Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Bexhill Down Leisure Hub
Masterplan Feasibility Report
Revision C
September 2014
2
Jersey Waterfront is a combined community leisure and
commercial development and is seen as a benchmark facility
for the Bexhill Down Leisure Hub.
3
Contents
Executive Summary
The Existing Facilities
1. The Site
1.1 Site Location and Area
1.2 Site Zones and Ownership
1.3 Site Analysis and Opportunities
1.4 Site Planning and Highways
1.5 Site Issues and Constraints
2. Sport Evaluation
2.1 Facility Models
2.2 Swimming and Sports Hall
2.3 Schedule of Accommodation
2.4 Operational Cost
2.5 Quality Benchmark Rates
2.6 Preliminary Budget Costs
2.7 Supplementary Accommodation
2.8 Consultations
3. Commercial Evaluation
3.1 Commercial Value
3.2 Commercial Opportunities
4. Site Masterplanning
4.0 Site Options
4.1 Option 1 Layout Testing
4.2 Option 2 Layout Testing
4.3 Option 3 Layout Testing
4.4 Recommended Masterplan Solutions
5. Design Principles
5.0 Leisure Centre layout Principles
5.1 Option 1
5.2 Option 2
5.3 Option 3
6. Financial Appraisal and Delivery Options
6.1 Financial Summary
6.2 Procurement options and recommendations
Appendices
1 Leisure Centre Operational Financial Business Report
2 Environmental Agency Site Advice
3 Feedback from User Groups
4 Retaining the Drill Hall in the Masterplan
4
VISION
Leisure Destination
Regeneration, Participation, Iconic, Social etc
LEISURE CENTRE
Target
Operational Proit less Rye Deicit= Revenue Proit
COMMERCIAL
Target
Site Value + Grants
= Total Available Capital = Sports Centre Project cost
Project Balance
This report compiled by FaulknerBrowns Architects, FMG (leisure consultants) and Wrenbridge Sport
(development advisors) reviews the feasibility of a new Leisure Centre and Masterplan Development at Bexhill
Down together with associated outline inancial advice.
The report includes our advice and recommendations in response to the brief set by RDC to include:
• Options evaluation on the nature and extent of facilities that could be provided
• Site Masterplanning to establish development options and layout principles
• Sketch scheme preparation and outline budget costs
• Financial Appraisal and delivery options
The report provides a summary of the project options and associated costs for a development which maximises the potential site value in balance with creating a ‘leisure destination’ by identifying:
• Optional facility mixes for the leisure centre with their associated varying range of project costs.
• Potential different commercial demand mixes for the site noting that at this early stage it is impossible to tie
down deinitive commercial demand.
• Optional masterplan solutions which acknowledge the site constraints and provide options dependent on the
commercial mix that the site and project may attract.
Executive Summary
A key requirement of the report was to explore the
potential vision to combines a new leisure centre with
potential commercial leisure, hotel and restaurant
developments to create a true leisure destination at the
site in a balance with exploring the feasibility to create a
facility which:
1. Explores the potential to deliver the leisure centre
cost neutrally by being inanced by the commercial development.
2. Operates cost neutrally or creates a net operational
proit to the Council taking into account the operating deicit of Rye Sports Centre.
In summary the report identiies that it is feasible to accommodate a new leisure centre on the Bexhill Down
site and that the vision to create a ‘destination’ may be
possible though to a greater or lesser extent dependant
on commercial demand and dependent on the balance of
maximising value oppose to destination vision.
5
However, the key overriding decisions at this stage are inancial. In summary the report suggests the following in regard to the two key project requirements:
1. Potential to deliver the leisure centre cost neutrally by being inanced by the commercial development:
• The project cost for the leisure centre would vary between £11 - £16m dependant on the facility mix
• The commercial value that could be delivered on the site varies between £5m - £7m dependant on demand (not incorporating any overage)*
Therefore there will be a funding gap of at least £6m for a basic scheme though more realistically, to achieve the
core scheme, approximately £8m and the overriding decision for the Council is how, and what level of, additional
grant funding, inancing and capital contribution can be secured.
2. Operates cost neutrally or creates a net operational proit to the Council taking into account the operating deicit of Rye Sports Centre:
• A new combined wet and dry leisure facility should create a net revenue proit to the Council of a minimum £145k up to £225k for an core facility model.
• It is understood from RDC Oficers that the Rye Sports Centre deicit could potentially be removed by placing the facility in a trust.
Therefore the Council could consider whether the facility revenue proit can be inanced to meet some of the capital contribution that will be required and as the proit increases with the facility mix whether this can be used to deliver the aspirational set of requirements.
* see page 17 for detail of potential overage.
6
To move the project forward it is advised that the following areas of additional study and
conirmation are required:-
Capital Contribution - to deine level of capital contribution possible which together with the commercial value will conirm the affordable facility mix and building size to include:
• Progress funding opportunities (Sport England, Other sports / regeneration funding)
• Negotiation with Land Securities PLC on Bexhill Swimming Pool site early redemption
• Other Council receipts (North East Bexhill housing contribution, etc)
• Financing of sports facility operational proit
Operation – to conirm potential operational proit
• Removal of Rye Sports Centre deicit• Review of operational business options
• Implications and options to cover temporary loss of the existing dry sport facility and
Drill Hall
Site Acquisition
• Agreement with ESCC on high school site acquisition principles including any overage
and any speciic requirements to be provided by RDC such as carparking for King Offa Primary School.
• Seek an ‘agreement in principle’ for the Drill Hall site acquisition including the exact
requirements for a replacement facility and any associated operational/maintenance
agreements.
Site Costs and Due Diligence - conirm the site costs and constraints to development
• Feasibility and cost (if possible) of moving the existing Egerton Brook culvert which
runs below part of the site which will conirm viable masterplan solutions.• Conirm exact location of culvert, size, depth and construction.• Explore and negotiate easement distances / options with the Environmental Agency.
• Feasibility and cost of relocating the existing sub-station on the SW site corner.• Agree with the Skills Centre ammendments to car park access, fencing removal and
potential to amalgamate car parking.
• Quotations on site clearance / demolitions
• Topographic and Ground investigation surveys of the site
• Other high level reviews to establish any further investigative surveys required
including Ecology and Asbestos
Procurement and Legals
• Agree the preferred procurement route.
• Establish the Council liabilities for VAT in regard to the procurement method and
commercial development.
7
The following aspects could be conirmed by procuring a detailed project study which takes the feasibility study forward once the above actions have been conirmed:-
Stakeholder and Public Engagement
• Start formal discussions and engagement with Sport England, the ASA and other
interested stakeholders.
• Commence detailed public and user group engagement to deine detailed project requirements.
New Leisure Centre
• Agreement to preferred facility mix (subject to capital contribution)• Conirm supplementary accommodation to be provided.• Conirmation of skate/bmx park requirement
Commercial / Destination
• Conirm the extent and type of commercial leisure demand and associated car parking requirements which will conirm masterplan solution.• Detailed assessment of commercial demand (will assist in deining preferred masterplan solution)
• Review of preferred mix in regard to value and destination vision
Car Parking
• Detailed transport assessment of car parking requirements based upon site
development options.
Detailed Masterplan and Speciication
From above a detailed masterplan could be more conidently set which conirms the Council’s project parameters and requirements for a tender in regard to the sports facility, commercial mix and design (layout, appearance and quality) together with
speciications outlining required inishes, services and sustainablity approaches.
8
Sports HallReception
Fitness Gym
Entrance
Spin Studio Wet Health Suite
9
Existing Facilities
The feasibility study requirement is centred around providing a new combined wet and
dry facility to replace both Bexhill Leisure Centre and Swimming Pool. Both facilities are
currently operated under contract by Freedom Leisure on behalf of RDC.
Bexhill Leisure Centre
The existing dry sports centre opened in 1990 and is now 24 years old. The facility is well
used though is now reaching the end of its natural lifespan having been heavily modiied during its life with the many compromises this brings.
The facility provides the following activities:-
• 4-Court Sports Hall c.18 x 32m with viewing gallery• 3no Squash Courts with viewing gallery
• Fitness Gym c.200sqm (suficient for 40 stations)• A Wet Health area with sauna, changing and relaxation area
• Spin Studio (training room)
• 2no Studio Spaces (provided adhoc as part of former bar and meeting room space)
A small climbing wall is located next to the itness area though this is insuficient in size to satisfy current safety regulations and is now unusable.
Externally the sports facility has a 60 space car park and a formal skateboard park.
Refurbishment and Extend Potential
An option for the site is to remodel and refurbish the Bexhill Leisure Centre to provide
the dry accommodation and extend to provide the swimming pool and any additional
requirements.
For the following key reasons this option has been discounted:
• The building design and layout does not readily lend itself to being modiied or extended to encompass a swimming pool facility particularly the central location of the
foyer and proximity of adjacent site boundaries.
• The building design is unattractive in appearance and the internal accommodation is of
a poor standard in comparison with modern quality expectations of a public facility.
• The internal activity spaces are not to current sporting standards and requirements and
could not be re-modelled to provide these cost effectively.
• The extent of refurbishment and remodelling required would be signiicant and would require the facility to satisfy current building regulations including adopting
current accessibility (part M) and energy eficiency regulations (Part L) which would be challenging and not cost effective..
In summary with the extent of changes required it would be more cost effective and offer
better value-for-money to replace the existing facility with a new modern facility which provides the level of quality, lexibility and eficiency expected.
10
Fun area and FlumeBexhill Leisure Pool
Shallow Water Toddler and Beach AreaLane Pool
350sqm Water Area
Bexhill Leisure Pool Layout Plan
11
Bexhill Leisure Pool
A new leisure facility would replace Bexhill Leisure Pool at Ravenside Retail Park. The
facility beneits from ease of access, a large car park and links to the commercial retail and food offers at Ravenside.
Bexhill Leisure Pool is c.1600sqm and has a 350sqm of water area conigured as a 25m 4-lane L shaped pool leading to a beached shallow toddler area. The pool has a wave machine and a separate lume.
Whilst the existing facility is very well used, and has a variety of water features, it is not to
current user expectations or sporting standards including:
• Pool surrounds are very narrow with numerous changes in level which do not satisfy
current accessibility regulations.
• The pool has raised channel edges oppose to the modern deck level access and transfer
channel arrangement.
• Changing is inadequately small and inlexible to effectively accommodate different user groups.
• The pool is undersized (4 lanes) to satisfy the user demand - particularly for learn-to-swim classes.
• The itness mezzanine level is under used and unattractive which is relected in the operational feedback on use.
Ownership
Bexhill Leisure Pool is occupied by RDC under a lease from Land Securities Group plc who
own the freehold of Ravenside Retail Park. The lease is for a term of 105 years from June
1989 at a peppercorn rent, with mutual break clauses at the 35th and 70th years, the irst break date therefore falling in June 2014.
If the break is exercised by the landlord, then the tenant will have the option of either:
a) relocating elsewhere on the development in a new facility built to a similar speciication at the landlord’s expense; or
b) receiving compensation from the landlord equivalent to the cost of constructing a new
facility elsewhere, built to a similar speciication
If the break is exercised by the tenant, no compensation is payable.
If the Council were to surrender the lease this may enable the Council to negotiate a
sharing of the potential increased value of the site that would be created by facilitating an
alternative use at that location, subject to planning considerations.
12
Aerial view of the Masterplan site. King Offa Primary School, the Drill
Hall and the existing Dry Sports Centre form the existing frontage to
the A259.
13
The Site
14
Site Location
Extent of Masterplan Development Site
A259
Bexhill Down
Ro
ute
of
BH
LR
Lo
nd
on
Rd
High SchoolRefectory
Dow
n Road
The Site
De La Warr Pavilion and Seafront Esplanade
Town Centre
High SchoolSite
SkillsCentre
Nursery
King OffaPrimary School
Playing Field
Dry SportsCentre
DrillHall
Ba
nc
roft
Ro
ad
SkatePark
Newlands Road
Bexhill Down
to west Bexhill /
Eastbourne
BHLR to
Hastings
to east Bexhill
Little Common Road
Belle Hill
15
Site Location1.1The proposed development site for the masterplan and new leisure facility is located to
the east of Bexhill Down at the key prominent junction of Little Common Road (A259) and the new BHLR (Bexhill Hasting Link Road).
The key aspects of the masterplan area are:
• The developable area consists of the previous High School site, the existing Dry Sports
Centre and the MoD’s Drill Hall.
• To the east of the site centre is the new Skills Centre and to the western edge King Offa Primary Academy, a new Nursery building and the school playing ield all of which are to remain and should be fully integrated into the masterplan principles.
• To the NW corner the High School Refectory building still exists which will be
demolished as part of the masterplan.
• Westwards the masterplan area has strong connections to Bexhill Down and could be
perceived as an extension of the parkland.
• The north and east is bounded by residential districts and to the south the town centre.
• The central High School site is currently rented as a motorcycle training area.
• A formal skate board park is located to the NW corner of the dry sports facility.
• The site has only one vehicular entrance off Down Road which serves the Dry Sports
Centre car park, located to the south and east of the building; the Drill Hall car park area
to it southern frontage; and the primary school car park area to the rear of the Drill Hall.
• The Skills Centre is accessed from the site and has dedicated car parking within its site
boundary.
• The site is axially to the end of the vista up London Road from the town centre and, in
the context of the overall town, is a clear northern counterpoint to the town centre with
the De La Warr Pavilion and the seafront esplanade to the south.
The masterplan area is approximately 5.83 acres.
16
17
Site Zones and Ownership1.2The masterplan developable area has 3 principle zones identiied by the drawing opposite provided by RDC. For the purposes of this report the zones are referred to as follows:
Zone 1 – is the ‘frontage zone’
Zone 2 – is a linear ‘central zone’ set between the skills centre and the nurseryZone 3 – is a modest area to the ‘NW corner site’.
Site Ownership
The masterplan area is currently under three ownerships as identiied on the drawing below.
1. RDC own the existing Leisure Centre site (pink area to SE)2. The MoD own the Drill Hall site (blue frontage area)3. The remainder of the site, previously the High School, is currently owned by ESCC but RDC have an agreement in principle to take ownership (remainder of pink area)
The current agreement principles of acquisition of the High School site are subject to an overage agreement between Rother District Council and East Sussex County Council. Presently it is suggested that this agreement may be subject to 50% overage for any value development of the site creates above the agreed loor value of £865k.
It is understood that the MoD are prepared to relinquish their site if an appropriate replacement facility can be provided by RDC. RDC need to seek an ‘agreement in principle’ for the acquisition of this site which is fundamental to the project and masterplan.
18
Skills Centre King Offa Primary School Nursery Facility
Vacant land next to Leisure Centre. Skate Park and Skills Centre Substation
A259 frontage
19
Site Analysis and Opportunities1.3The key observations on the site which inform the site masterplan evaluations are as
follows:
• The site offers the potential to create a gateway development to Bexhill with commercial
and leisure facilities having active ‘shop window’ frontages to the SE corner onto the
key junction of the A259 and the BHLR and continuing along the southern edge which is prominent from approach up the A529.
• The masterplan area has a strong relationship to Bexhill Down and currently feels part
of the park. The Primary School and playing ield feel particularly connected to the park space as does the frontage area which contains some signiicant mature tree outside the developable area on the southern frontage.
• The site is served by a single vehicular entrance and road interface off Down Road at the
junction with the A25 which then serves the school, nursery and Skills Centre in addition to the requirements of the new development.
• It is noted that the new BHLR will quickly rise to irst loor level as it leaves the A259 junction to cross the underpass into the site and that the site will generally be viewed obliquely by drivers (opposed to the southern frontage which will be seen from the junction and up London Road)
• To the east side of the BHLR a new bus interchange is being created which will link to the
masterplan site for pedestrians via the underpass.
• The southern frontage orientation lends itself to address the sun path.
• A substation exists to the important SE corner of the site which would need to be
relocated as part of the masterplan development.
• There are four footpath linkages to the site which should remain but could be adjusted by the masterplan - linking to the northern residential district Bancroft Road, east-west across the site between the school/nursery and to the new BHLR underpass, and from the NW
corner site to Bexhill Down.
• The site is generally lat with approximately a 1m fall west to east though no detailed topographic data exists and will need to be carried out to inform any detailed development
of the masterplan.
The masterplan area contains six existing buildings as follows:-
• King Offa Primary School - the school is a feature building which should inform the masterplan solution particularly in regard to the functional requirements of child pedestrian
safety and parent and coach drop-off; and also the axial design of the building with its feature central clock tower entrance.
• The nursery is newly built and its integration and access should be considered by the
masterplan.
• The Skills Centre (shown overleaf) is to be retained with an area north of the centre
allocated by ESCC for future expansion.
• The existing Bexhill Leisure Centre is to be demolished.
• Drill Hall - the masterplan assumes that the MoD facility is demolished and the accommodation reprovided by either a new facility as part of the masterplan development
or elsewhere (see overleaf)
• High School Refectory - the refectory will be demolished though feasibly could be used to provide temporary accommodation for either the MoD or Sports Centre during site
development.
20
Skills Centre
The newly built Skills Centre will remain on the site and consideration should be given to improving and
integrating the frontage, which includes business spaces currently containing a bistro cafe and hairdressing
salon, which could add to the mix and vibrancy of the masterplan vision.
The building is a basic portal framed structure with a clean industrial look and feel with vehicular service access
space to facilitate the teaching programmes.
The Skills Centre and associated car park is currently fenced off from the masterplan site.
The Council need to explore the potential with ESCC to integrate the Skill Centre more comprehensively into the
masterplan including removing fencing, and amalgamating the car park with the sports centre car park together
with the potential opportunity to extend this car parking northwards into the Skills Centre ‘expansion zone’.
Drill Hall
The Drill Hall forms a joint MoD ACF (Army Cadet Force) and ATC (Air Training Corps) training centre.
The majority of the Drill Hall building is simple brick structures. However, the frontage is quite grand and whilst not of substantial architectural value may have sentimental value particularly for it’s historic links to the war.
The MoD have advised that they would be prepared to give the building and site to RDC in exchange for a new
facility.
The existing Drill Hall building is currently oversized (c.820sqm) for its needs and is in poor condition. The layouts opposite show the existing building and an example layout of a typical benchmark new ACF/ATC combined
facility at Gravesend, provided by the MoD, which is approximately 350sqm.
The MoD have highlighted that a new facility would require to have some visual presence though are happy in
principle for the facility to be part of a new leisure centre with appropriate segregation of use when required
solely by the MoD.
The accommodation required includes meeting and classrooms which could be utilised by the leisure centre
during daytime periods when not required by the MoD. The ‘hall’ space is a modest studio sized space (c.9x7m) used by the MoD for drill marching practice 3 - 4 nights per week and therefore again could be lexibly shared.
The key dedicated areas of the MoD accommodation would be the general stores, band instrument storage,
ofice accommodation, a practice ‘light deck’ and the required iring range and associated ammo stores.
The iring range requires 2-3 lanes which would equate to an overal width of approximately 4m and 20-25m length. This could be provided as an underground pipe system which may allow a more eficient layout and cost effective solution. The armoury would be via a Home Ofice approved ‘arms box’ and small magazine safe.
It is highlighted that whilst the above has been discussed ‘in principle’ a formal agreement should be sought
which also deines the responsibility for ongoing maintenance, sharing of accommodation, a detailed brief of requirements, project costs including FF&E, and temporary accommodation during development.
The presumption of this report is to demolish and replac the Drill Hall. However, should part, or all, of the
Drill Hall be retained then this can can be accommodated in some of the masterplan responses or as part of a
refurbishment and extend approach to the existing dry sports facility. This is shown in appendix 4.
21
Existing Drill Hall Layout Gravesend Facility
Artist’s impression of how the Drill Hall frontage could look if refurbished.
23
• The north west corner site should be provided with a public footpath link through to
Bexhill Down.
Highways
ESCC have advised that consideration is given to a mini roundabout to form access into
the site given the likely increase in trafic entering the site. It would also offer an element of trafic calming which would be beneicial to both school related trafic and school children / visitors walking / cycling to school or proposed leisure centre.
It has also been advised that the proposed development of the site would be unlikely to
create any net impact on the road infrastructure above the previous high school use which
would require any further signiicant improvements or changes necessary.
ESCC have conirmed that the developing proposals would not attract an off-site inancial contribution but rather improvements pedestrian / cycle routes across / within the site
which would be required as part of the masterplan development.
Car Parking
Any detailed development of the masterplan should consider a lexible shared parking use for the school and sports facility given that the peaks (i.e. busiest times) are unlikely
to conlict with one another.
The design of the car park / vehicular access would need to accommodate school drop off
and turning areas for coach parking.
In regard to the proposed development options ESCC have provided the following parking
guidelines:
Swimming Pools and Sports Centres (D2) - 1 space per 10sqm of each usable sport area (e.g. court, hall, pitch etc) as well as spectator spaces and levels of staff. This would
suggest based on the core sports activity areas (c.1750sqm) 175 spaces are required.
Cafe/Restaurants (A3) - 1 space per 5sqm of usable space, plus one per two full time staff working at any one time. This would suggest based on 350-750sqm of public space (60% of GFA) 70-150 spaces are required.
Hotel (C1) - 1 space per bedroom plus 1 space per two full time staff likely to be working at any one time. It is likely that the Leisure and Hotel will have similar peak periods and
therefore the hotel may require 80 - 100 spaces.
Primary School - Existing parking provision should be reprovided though potentially ‘lexible’ with sports parking. RDC need to seek conirmation of staff parking requirements.
Residential - 1 space per small dwelling. 2 spaces per larger dwelling
The above guidelines provide a high level assessment of potential car parking
requirements. However, a green travel plan and transport assessment of the existing
transport and parking infrastructure should be considered which seeks a principle of
minimising the use of cars particularly in respect to the new bus interchange proximity.
It is advised that generally a leisure centre of this type and edge of town centre location
would usually be provided with around 125-150 spaces. Noting the existing dry sports has c.60 spaces.
Based on the above for the purposes of masterplanning we advise that a car park of 150
spaces has been assumed without hotel/restaurants. With a hotel and restaurants the
guidance suggests that a car park of 250+ spaces may be required. All residential has
been considered with a minimum of 1 parking space per apartment / townhouse.
24
Flood Zone 2 - land assessed as having between a 1 in 100 and 1 in
1,000 annual probability of river
looding (1% – 0.1%), or between a 1 in 200 and 1 in 1,000 annual
probability of sea looding (0.5% – 0.1%) in any year
Flood Zone 3 - land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual
probability of river looding (>1%), or a 1 in 200 or greater annual
probability of looding from the sea (>0.5%) in any year
Surface Water (30 yr) - land assessed as having 30, 100
and 1000 year risk of surface
water looding based on existing assessment of building and
permeable areas.
Line of Existing Culvert provided by the Environment Agency
Flood Zones as provided by the Environment Agency
25
Site Issues and Constraints1.5The following site issues and constraints should be explored further as part of any
detailed development of the project and masterplan:
Flood Risk
The maps opposite provided by the Environment Agency highlight that the frontage of the
masterplan site sits beside, and partly within, lood zones from one of the town’s main surface water courses to the sea - Egerton Brook.
To protect the development from risk of looding the buildings and site would need to be raised and mitigations may be required such as sustainable SuDS drainage systems.
In progressing the project a full FRA (lood risk assessment) would be required to inform the masterplan development and the detailed requirements to prevent any lood impact from development on surrounding properties. The FRA may need to take into account the
impact of the new elevated BHLR which presumably may reduce lood spread eastwards and therefore potentially increase risk westwards.
Culvert
The plan opposite provided by the Environment Agency shows the route of the culverted
section of Egerton Brook which passes beneath the Bexhill Leisure Centre site and then
cranks diagonally across the Down Road junction. The route of the culvert effectively cuts the SE corner off the prominent frontage site. As a natural water course the culvert is
owned and maintained by the EA.
The EA recommend that no buildings or structures (including fences) are undertaken
within an 8m easement zone of the culvert line to allow for maintenance and replacement. This would mean either the masterplan has to respect the 8m easement zone, the easement zone is negotiated down, or the culvert would require realigning. Taking into account the stepping route and road junctions any amended route, to avoid the masterplan area, may not be a viable. It is advised that it may be possible to bridge over
the cuvert as long as appriate access is provided to maintain and replace.
The EA have conirmed that a CCTV survey of the culvert was undertaken in 2009 which highlighted the need for repair works between the inlet and the irst manhole adjacent to the dry sports centre. Remedial works were carried out to the failing section in 2010 and
a further survey was completed in 2011 to determine the condition of the repaired section
of the culvert. The survey showed that some sections of the pipe were deformed but the
overall condition is fair. The culvert is programmed to be re-surveyed in 2017.
It is understood from Council Oficers that the culvert route may have hydrostatic storage pumping stations along its route which should also be investigated.
Informal advice from engineers suggests that realiging the culvert may be possible to
the SE corner of the site to open up the potential of this prominent frontage corner. The
size and depth of the culvert is unknown though assuming 1.5m diameter and 1.5m depth a cost in the region of £450-£500/lm plus £15k for forming connections would be an appropriate allowance. The extent of realignment would suggest an overal allowance of
£100k may be appropriate.
It is highlighted whilst the cost of realigning is relatively modest this wuold need to
be agreed with the EA who may use the opportunity to revert back to an open ditch or
improve the route to prevent low restrictions upstream and lood risk. Additionally, as above, the impact of the new BHLR may have not been assessed in regard to lood risk.
It is noted that the negotiations with the EA may be protracted, and if realignment were
acceptable, attaining design approval may take 8-10 weeks, assuming no signiicant legal hurdles.
26
Water Mains around the site provided by Southern Water
Lines of Existing Gas Mains
Sewer Routes around site as provided by Southern Water
27
Utilities
• Water - Southern Water have conirmed that the primary water mains and foul drains are routed outside the site to road lines. It is assumed that redundant dead-end spurs may exist from the High School. As part of any pool project the discharge capacity into the foul drain will need to be established to inform costs in regard to pool backwash.
• Electric - No information available. It has been assumed that the existing substation to SE corner can be moved which will require conirmation.
• Gas - RDC have provided the existing gas mains drawings shown opposite which shows a mains routes following the culvert line and a run up the centre of the site to the old High
School site.
It is advised that the Council should carry out a full due diligence review of the site(s)
including seeking and procuring legal searches, surveys (ground investigations,
topographic surveys, asbestos surveys), Services investigations (full statutory services
infrastructure drawing and capacities) and planning (ecology, trafic) of the site.
28
The aspiration is to create a sports facility which
creates a lexibility and a balance between leisure and formal sport as Horsham Pool by FaulknerBrowns.
29
Sports Evaluation
30
Facility Model Basic Core Supplementary
Swimming * **
Dry Sports Hall * *
Fitness Gym (350sqm) Studios (2no) Sauna / Steam Spa Facility Soft Play Creche Squash Climbing Bowling (6-lane) Retail * Larger
** Larger again
Squash and Soft Play are provided in the Core Model
31
The Facility Models2.1For the purposes of identifying and testing both operational and capital affordability
of the leisure centre a range of facility models have been established, as illustrated
opposite, for three potential scenarios:-
• Firstly a ‘basic’ model which is the absolute minimum that could be provided to create a
traditional wet and dry leisure facility.
• Secondly a ‘core’ model which includes larger activity areas and secondary functions
where there is a proven demand or are activities already provided within the existing
facilities to include soft play, squash and a small retail area.
• Additionally a list of ‘supplementary’ facilities have been identiied which may increase the attraction / draw to the facility and assist in creating a true ‘destination’ to include
a creche, a spa facility, climbing, bowling and increased pool waters. We highlight
that some of these activities could be provided as part of the sports centre operation,
potentially leased to a specialist operator, or alternatively provided separately by the
commercial sector.
Within Appendix 1 we include the ‘operational inancial business report’ compiled by FMG for the sports facility. The irst part of this report evaluates the nature and extent of facilities which should be provided against supply and demand analysis of the Bexhill
catchment area, feedback from Sport England’s facility planning modelling for the area,
and assessment of the operational performance and feedback of the existing wet and dry
facilities.
In summary this analysis concludes with the following guidance which has been
interpreted in the models:-
Swimming
Sport England’s facility planning model suggests c.400sqm water area demand for
Bexhill. The supply and demand assessment of the existing centre usage, including
data from the current operators, suggests 500sqm of water area would be sustainable
and justiiable particularly to satisfy demand for learn-to-swim classes. The basic brief therefore accommodates 400sqm water area and the core 500sqm. The supplementary
increases the area further to 600sqm as detailed overleaf.
Health and Fitness
Using a catchment area of 3 miles the total itness demand is c.1850 users. Using industry standards this establishes a itness gym requirement of c.74 stations. It is highlighted that the current gyms within the existing Bexhill dry sports and swimming facilities provide
90 stations though are not used to capacity. For all models a 350sqm gym has been
used which would provide 70 - 85 itness stations. The supply and demand analysis also suggests 2no studios are provided.
Sports Halls
The existing hall at Bexhill sports Centre is at 100% capacity at peak times. The halls at the High School and College at 55% and 58% respectively. Sport England would expect a sports hall to be provided as part of any new leisure development. For the briefs a 4-court hall has been suggested as there is no justiiable demand for a larger 6-court hall. The exact size of the 4-court sports hall is discussed overleaf.
The checklist opposite summarises the key activities included in each facility model
tested.
32
Basic Brief
400sqm water area
6-lane 25m pool and 100sqm learner pool
OR
8 lane 25m pool
Core Brief
500sqm water area
6-lane 25m pool and 100sqm learner pool with modest
seperate leisure pool
OR
conjoined to learner poolOR
conjoined to main pool.
Supplementary Brief
600sqm water area
8-lane 25m pool and leisure pool.
OR
Full leisure pool
Existing Bexhill Swimming Pool
(to same scale)
350sqm water area
An example of a potential mix for the core model with 500sqm of water area would be Stockton Pool which
includes an inherent lexibility between leisure and lane swimming through the programming of a leisurised 6-lane pool, separate learner pool with movable loor and a modest freeform area for toddlers, infants and juniors.
33
Swimming2.2The range of facility models includes increasing the swimming water area incrementally.
For a wet sports facility the support accommodation and building area is generally a
factor of the water area. For the range of briefs from basic to supplementary the water
area has been increased from 400sqm to 500sqm to 600sqm with a proportional increase
in support, changing and plant. This range of water areas has been tested in the business
report in regard to operational performance.
The diagrams opposite illustrate some options for how the varying area of water could
be conigured and we highlight some of the key considerations in determining the water coniguration:-
• The amount of leisure pool to be provided in lieu of ‘traditional’ lane swimming or learn-to-swim pools.
• The amount of ‘leisurisation’ to be included either within the main pool or as part of a
separate leisure waters noting that the existing swimming pool has a wave pool, shallow
beached toddler area and a lume.
• Leisure Variety - providing fun features to cater for the various age groups of toddler wiht parents, infants, juniors and through to teenagers.
• Water conidence - it is good practice to provide a range of water depths from shallow waters for toddlers (300mm), to learn-to-swim / infants (600mm), to swim classes (900mm) through to full depth waters for experienced swimmers generally 1.8m-2.0m for community pools.
• The lexibility of the 25m pool - it is suggested to maximise lexibility that a movable loor could be provided to one end or alternatively along one side to allow variable depths to suit swimming programmes and aid a water conidence transition from shallow to deeper waters. However, it is highlighted that a movable loor would restrict the ability to provide leisure water features.
• Alternatively a traditional ixed 25m pool tank could be provided, with depths ranging from a shallow end c.0.9m then sloping down to a c.2.0m deep end, and a movable loor could be provided to the learner pool.
• It is highlighted that the ASA have advised a preference for the water area to be
conigured as either an 8 lane pool or a 6 lane and learner pool to facilitate learn-to-swim classes.
At feasibility stage the water coniguration does not impact signiicantly on the outline building capital cost assessments. However, we highlight that the outline costs would
require additional budget to cover the cost of a movable loor and lume each of which can cost in the region of £250k.
In discussion with RDC, and to satisfy the supply and demand for swimming classes, it is
suggested that a mix of traditional water and leisure is provided to provide similar mix to
the existing pool offer. It is suggested that a separate learner pool would be operationally
helpful to provide shallow water area for water conidence and learn-to-swim classes and therefore ‘freeing-up’ the main pool for either lane swimming or leisure. A good example of a water coniguration that may be appropriate is Stockton waters as shown opposite.
34
35
The existing sports hall within Bexhill Leisure Centre is 32 x 18m which was the previous
Sport England standard size for a 4 badminton court hall. The current Sport England recommended standard size is now a larger 34.5 x 20m.
As per the ‘basic’ diagrams below the existing size will accommodate all the core sports at a recreational club level (badminton, volleyball, netball and basketball). The beneits of the new enlarged and ‘core’ size includes a full size netball court, ability to create two recreational volleyball courts and greater lexibility for providing coach and modest team bench areas to the hall side.
It is advised that the larger hall, as per the core model, should be targeted for inclusion.
The sports hall should be a minimum of 7.5m clear height.
A part of a detailed design process we suggest the design of the sports hall should
consider whether it is a ‘black box’ or whether natural light is to be introduced. As an
extreme it is possible, and common on the continent, to create ground level clerestorey
glazing around the hall to provide openness, visual permeability, and a ‘community’ hall feel oppose to a traditional ‘sports’ hall.
Sports Hall
Basic Core
Extract from Sport England Guidance
Existing Leisure Centre Layout
36
Basic Core Supplementary Activities
37
Schedule of Accommodation
The accommodation schedule for the facility models is summarised opposite.
The schedule has been benchmarked against equivalent facilities, compliance with Sport
England guidance and tested with layout plans. Appropriate allowances have been made
of 10% plant, 5% circulation, and 2.5% internal walls together with a modest 2.5% design contingency reserve.
The schedule highlights that for the facility models the GIFA would equate to
approximately:
Basic 4000sqm
Core 5000sqm
An assessment of the schedule, assuming that the facility is over two storeys, and taking
into account double height spaces, suggests footprint requirements of:-
Basic 3250sqm
Core 4000sqm
For the supplementary model total areas are provided for the additional activities which
may be included inclusive of the additional support accommodation allowances required.
In addition to the above area the Drill Hall would require an additional c.350sqm of
accommodation together with the underground iring range.
For the purposes of the feasibility masterplanning assessment a 4000sqm footprint has
been used for the leisure facility.
External Requirements
External to the new leisure facility the following requirements would need to be
accommodated:
• Carparking for the sports centre will require 5% accessible parking allocation in accordance with Sport England guidance.
• Cycle Parking (covered and uncovered)
• Parking and drop-off bays for coaches, school buses and mini-buses.
• Access for maintenance and deliveries including chemical delivery to the pool water
plantroom.
• Fire vehicle access to the building perimeter and ambulance access near to the irst aid point.
• Refuse area with appropriate refuse truck access.
The current site includes a skate / bmx park as part of the dry sports facility. RDC will be
reprovidng this facility but at this stage no decision has been made as to whether this will
be provided as part of the Bexhill Down site development or reprovided elsewhere.
2.3
39
Operational Cost2.4The operational inancial business report within Appendix 1 establishes the following
operational costs for each facility model and concludes in the net income / loss to the
Council after operational management overheads and proit are taken into account:
• Sales (based on supply and demand analysis and review of current facility
performance)
• Employee Costs (generally 60% of operational cost with an increase of current stafing due to increased services)
• Premises Costs (appropriate allowance for maintenance and replacement costs)
• Marketing
• Other Costs
• Costs of Sales
• Finance, Overheads and Proit• Net Income / loss
The sales income and costs for the basic and core briefs are summarised opposite.
Both facility models are estimated to achieve a net income - for the basic model this is estimated as £144k and the core £226k.
The net income does not take into account the operating deicit of Rye Sports Centre which is currently £154k which would reduce / omit the potential proit. We have been advised that it may be possible to pass Rye Sports Centre into a trust to handover the
operational and deicit responsibility.
It is advised that the business modelling:-
• Is based on industry standard approaches to operation
• Is based on pessimistic assumptions in regard to sales
• Does not include any capital inancing of the building
The schedule opposite summarises the operational costs of the basic and core facility
models and demonstrates that each would provide a net proit to the Council after operational inance, overheads and proit are taken into account. It is highlighted that these igures are based on a fourth year projection which is assumed as a mature year.
40
Example projects of a good quality benchmark leisure wet and dry community leisure facilities.
Example of the Sport England affordable model.
41
Quality Benchmark Rates2.5For the purposes of deining a preliminary budget cost for the leisure centre a range of rates has been reviewed from the Sport England ‘affordable’ low-cost model to a high quality benchmark facility cost.
We advise that from midpoint to higher would be deliverable with design development
representing a medium to high quality facility, whereas the low-cost model would not achieve the project vision and would probably not allow a design to be delivered to the speciic site requirements.
Opposite we illustrate the Sport England ‘affordable’ low-cost model and good quality benchmark leisure facilities.
Affordable Models
Sport England ‘affordable’ models are based on basic, generally square, stand-alone facilities on a clean site – a more accurate terminology is low cost or budget models.
The affordable models are based on a basic external appearance and materials and
therefore do not allow for any signiicant architectural quality or bespoke design which in our experience is required to make these facilities a success in regard to creating
attractive buildings.
The vision for the Bexhill facility will be tailored to complement any commercial element;
be attractive, visually and socially engaging; and satisfy the site ‘gateway’ requirements.
We therefore suggest that Sport England’s ‘affordable’ model would not match the
required vision for Bexhill.
Cost Guidance
Sport England’s affordable models suggest the following building cost rates including
preliminaries, overheads and proits which we have rounded with an inlation factor to 2014:-
Swimming facility £1840sqm @ 3Q 2011 + 3.5% c.£1900 @ 2104
(6 lane and learner)
Dry sports facility £1200 @ 2Q 2012 + 3.5% c.£1250 @ 2014
(4 court hall, changing and H&F)
Combined wet and dry facility £1525sqm @ 2Q 2013 +3% c.£1575 @ 2014
(6 lane pool, learner and 4 court hall)
The Bexhill project is a combined wet and dry facility with an extensive health and itness offer we therefore suggest a rate of c.£1575sqm is representative of the low-cost affordable model.
In comparison for a bespoke high quality facility, from benchmarking similar facilities,
more appropriate rates would be in the region of £2600sqm for wet accommodation and £1500sqm for dry accommodation which equates to proportionally £2000sqm for the
facility mix.
For the preliminary cost plans we have taken a midpoint £1750sqm for the building cost
between the low and high rates. We believe this would represent the minimum rate that
would enable a appropriate facility to be delivered.
Summary
Sport England Affordable Mid Quality High Quality
£1575sqm £1750sqm £2000sqm
42
Facility Model Basic Core Supplementary
(all)
Area 4000sqm 5000sqm 6500sqm
£sqm rate @£1750sqm @£1750sqm @£1750sqm
Building Cost 7.0 8.75 11.4
Car Park 0.4 0.4 0.4
Externals 0.5 0.5 0.5
SUB-TOTAL 7.9 9.65 12.3
Client Contingency 10% 0.8 0.96 1.2
Site Abnormals 0.5 0.5 0.5
CONSTRUCTION COST 9.1 11.0 13.9
Project Fees 12% 1.1 1.3 1.7
FF&E Allowance 0.5 0.5 0.5
PROJECT COST £10.7m £12.8m £16.1m
Say, £11m £13m £16m
Note if £2000sqm is used for the building costs the overall Project Cost would be:
£12m £14.5m
The above costs do not include allowance for the Drill Hall accommodation:
350sqm @ £1500sqm, contingency, fees, FF&E say, £750k
43
Preliminary Budget Costs2.6The cost plan opposite provides a preliminary assessment of the project cost for the new sports centre models.
The building cost is based upon the £1750sqm rate described in section 2.5. The impact on the overall project cost is shown if a rate of £2000sqm is required.
An allowance for car parking is shown based on a rate of £2500 per space for surface parking x 150 spaces, c.£400k, and external works. Together these represent c.10% of the build cost which is a common allowance for the immediate realm to a sports centre, utility connections
and drainage. We highlight that this allowance may not fully allow for the enhanced public
plaza as part of a larger commercial development.
10% has been allowed as a client contingency. The level of contingency is dependent on
the attitude to risk and can vary from 5% to 15%, or more. We advise that 10% is a modest allowance at feasibility stage which allows for a level for design reserve. As the project design develops it would be usual to review whether the level of contingency can be reduced.
An outline allowance for site abnormals has been included for the known site issues-
• Demolition of Drill Hall and the existing dry sports facility
• Site Clearance and preparation to sports centre site
(excavation, temporary works, removal of obstructions)
• Floodrisk mitigation to sport centre building
• Sub-station relocation • Re-alignment of Culvert (£100k)
We highlight that this allowance should be tested and at this stage and is unlikely to cover the
cost for the greater masterplan area including general site clearance, demolishing the high
school refectory, removal/replacement of fences, etc.
Based upon the building brief and site issues the total construction cost range is shown for the
facility models.
An allowance for design and professional project fees is generally in the region of 12% of construction cost.
An allowance for FF&E is estimated to include for loose client supply pool and sports
equipment, furniture and itness equipment. It is highlighted that some equipment particularly the itness equipment may be leased or inanced as part of the operational costs which may reduce this cost.
The total project cost range is shown noting that the supplementary total of £16m is only if all additional activities are included.
The cost for the Drill Hall accommodation is shown separately which would be an additional
cost to the totals.
We advise that the preliminary budget costs excludes the following which would require
further detailed review:-
• Inlation beyond mid-2014 • VAT (including implications of any commercial development)
• Land acquisition cost
• Utility diversions (including culvert)
• Asbestos removal
• Any off-site works (incl. highways) • Section agreements / contributions
At this early design stage the building cost is preliminary and would vary modestly between
the alternative masterplan arrangements though at this stage this cannot be assessed
accurately and would not signiicantly change the overal inancial picture. In particular we highlight that building to the southeast may have a modest premium due to the lood mitigation and visual prominence though this may be offset by offering a more attractive
facility with increased throughput and the revenue this delivers.
45
Supplementary Accommodation2.7The schedules opposite summarises the break down of the operational costs (top) and the
additional building and equipment capital costs (as section 2.6) that would be required
individuallly for each of the identiied potential supplementary activities if provided by the Council as part of the sports facility development.
The summary suggests that bowling could potentially ‘wash its own face’ if the proit inanced the capital cost whereas the increase in swimming provision would require a signiicant capital expenditure for no revenue return.
The costs include the following assumptions and as detailed in the business report the
following operational impacts:
Leisure Swimming
To provide an additional 100sqm of water area, a total of 600sqm water area, with a more
‘leisure’ focused offer together with associated changing and support accommodation.
• Capital Cost: +400sqm @ £2600sqm + 10% contingency + 12% fees = say, £1.3m
• Operational Cost: Additional Stafing, premises, utilities and capital cost outweigh the marginal income increase. It may be possible to increase income and £ for £ will reduce the projected deicit but may create additional risk to the Council.
Spa Facility
To provide a modest relaxation area with treatment rooms, spa pool in addition to sauna and
steam room.
• Capital Cost: +100sqm @ £2600sqm + 10% contingency + 12% fees = say, £300k
• Operational Cost: As per spa consultant projection and adjusted for operator proit and premises costs.
Creche
To provide a small creche facility with WC, staff room and store integrated within the overal
sports facility.
• Capital Cost: +100sqm @ £1500sqm + 10% contingency + 12% fees = say, £200k
• Operational: Although limited hours, the cost of stafing will be very likely to exceed users and income projections. This is normal in creche operation.
Climbing
For a climbing / bouldering wall equivalent in size and area to Crawley’s K2 Leisure Centre.
• Capital Cost: +300sqm @ £1500sqm + 10% contingency + 12% fees = say, £600k
• Operational Cost: Assumes 15,000 visits per annum (300 per week) which may be
optimistic given the proile of demographics in the catchment area. The council may be able to negotiate with a specialist provider a rent but this is unlikely to cover the cost of debt
inancing. We would expect the net income £30k to be paid as a fee to the operate the facility (for example Hi Sport).
10-pin Bowling (see also section 3.2)
To provide a 6-lane hall space as part of the leisure centre i.e. controlled from the same reception.
• Capital Cost: +300sqm @ £1500sqm + 10% contingency + 12% fees = say, £600k
• Operational Cost: Uses an average £30k income per lane taken from performance data of similar facilities plus an additional £25k for other associated income. It may be possible to increase catering and party estimates to increase proit but could expose the Council to third party revenue risk. It would be preferential for an independent specialist provider to deliver
and manage the facility.
46
Consultations2.8As part of this study the following parties have been consulted to inform the proposals
together with RDC Oficers, Planners and ESCC Highways as detailed within the report.
South East Reserve Forces and Cadet Association
SERCA attended a meeting at Bexhill Town Hall on 29th April 2014 to discuss the
principles of the Drill Hall land exchange with the MoD and provided an outline brief for
a replacement accommodation as discussed in Section 1.2. We advise that RDC should
continue this dialogue to create a formal agreement.
Freedom Leisure
As current operators of the existing facilities Freedom Leisure have provided their
operational data for FMG to assess as part of operational business report. Freedom have
also provided operator ‘on the ground’ advice on what they believe would create an
attractive and successful facility for Bexhill.
Sport England
Sport England have provided their facility planning modelling for the Bexhill area which
has been used and interogated as part of the operational business report. The project principles have been discussed with Sport England.
Sport England design and cost guidance notes have been consulted in reviewing the
facility models, costs estimates and outline feasibility design testing including:
• Swimming Pool Design and Guidance 2013
• Sports Hall Design and Layouts 2012
• Accessible Sports Facilities 2010, audits, checklists and standard layouts
• Affordable Swimming Pools 2012, Sports Halls 2012 and Sports Centres 2013
• Fitness and Exercise Spaces
• Car Parking and Landscaping
• Better Places for Sport
We highlight that in some areas Sport England guidance is excessive therefore in deining the schedule of accommodation we have adopted pragmatic assumptions based on
benchmarking Sport England projects and making reductions where, from our experience, this is usually acceptable.
47
ASA
The ASA have advised that Bexhill has a good network of clubs which are well run and
attended. They advise that a new pool at Bexhill should focus on swimming development
and teaching opposed to competition (Bexhill does not register on the competition
information across Sussex).
However, the ASA have advised that Bexhill also has both a disability user group and a
squad structure with a competition focus who currently do organise their own galas so
it would be beneicial to integrate the ability to host community level competition which would include c.150 spectator seats and c.150 for competitors on poolside. Within
Sussex , Crawley K2, albeit not within close proximity to Bexhill, would continue to provide for higher level regional competitions.
The ASA recommend that a suitable facility for Bexhill would be a 25m 6 or 8 lane pool.
An 8 lane pool with a movable loor would provide great lexibility and an excellent community offer though a 6 lane pool with a large learner pool with movable loor would provide signiicant lexibility including accommodating simultaneous programming.
We advise that RDC should open up a formal dialogue with both Sport England and
the ASA to assist in the detailed development of the project particularly in regard to
establishing the potential and requirements to achieve any funding contribution.
User Groups
Consultations with user groups to assist deining and reining a design is paramount in regard to elements such as accessibility and functionality. For this building mix this
most commonly assists deining the most appropriate pool water coniguration, access requirements to the water, and lexibility of playing surface and heating/ventilation to the sports hall. However, at this early feasibility stage, particularly when the project inances are undeined, we advise full public engagement can undermine the process by setting undeliverable aspirations. Therefore as part of the study RDC have sent out notiications to the core user groups to request their comments on the supply and demand assessments
and proposed facility models. This feedback is included in Appendix 3 and includes some
feedback on key aspects that different groups would like to see.
The feedback supports the proposals with an emphasis on the need for inlusion of lexible studio / treatment spaces and suggests a preference for a vinyl type sports hall loor. The rowing club have suggested an indoor rowing tank is considered for inclusion.
We advise that once the project inances are clearer and the project proceeds to full design then full public engagement should be addressed including a stakeholder group,
user group forum, public displays of developing proposals and website/social media
interfaces.
Environment Agency
As detailed in section 1.5 the Environment Agency have been consulted. Their comments
and advice on the site development is included in appendix 2.
Willmott Dixon Contractors
The SCAPE framework (see section 6.2) includes a single contractor Willmott Dixon who
have contacted FaulknerBrowns to express an interest in delivering the scheme under the
framework. We advise that WDC have a strong track record of delivering local authority
wet and dry sports facilities. In regard to commercial development WDC have advised
that they would be willing to discuss with the Council the contributions they could make
to the project with their regeneration team who can assess development opportunity and their ‘be here’ residential rental division under which they may be able to act as developer
alongside being the building contractor for the sports centre/development.
48
Jersey Waterfront combines a sports centre with
restaurants and a cinema with a central plaza area.
49
Commercial Evaluation
50
3 - 4 Restaurants
80 - 100 bed budget hotel
Boutique Cinema
Boutique Bowling
52
Commercial Opportunities3.2For the purpose of reviewing masterplan options for the site the following considerations
and advice has been followed:
Residential
RDC have conirmed that sheltered housing should not to be part of the development.
RDC planners have advised on the likely acceptable type, height and densities for the
allowable residential development as described in section 1.4.
Apartments and townhouses would require dedicated parking of at least 1 space per unit
with consideration for visitor and service vehicles.
Hotel
Whilst there appears to be some demand from budget hotel chains it is highlighted that if
a hotel could not be attracted that an approach should be taken whereby the masterplan
is lexible to be amended for this accommodation to become private apartments or not be included.
It is advised that a budget hotel may not necessarily require a dedicated car park as long
as parking for customers is available. Therefore the management and size of the sports centre car park would require consideration and there is a risk that the size of car park required may exceed the value of providing hotel to the council due to the value of land
used.
A lexible option would be to plan the site to allow either a hotel or apartments. However, in this circumstance the car parking philosophy would need to be carefully considered.
Retail
In discussion with RDC oficers, planners and urban design team it has been advised that the introduction of a mini-supermarket would not be in accordance with the permitted development plan and would not sit comfortably with the leisure ‘destination’ vision and
therefore, despite the value and footfall this could create, is unlikely to be approved.
Restaurants
As with the hotel there appears to be some demand for restaurants though it would
only be attractive if a signiicant footfall can be created by a destination which would probably need to include commercial leisure such as bowling or a cinema. However,
restaurant groups may potentially perceive the site as a drive-by offer opposed to a town centre offer. If so the masterplan needs to address and consider this. For a drive-by offer restaurants would require signiicant parking and open frontage akin to a retail park.
An alternative consideration, and a more pragmatic and achievable vision, would be to
incorporate commercial space within, or amalgamated with, the sports centre building
which could provide food outlets or community space dependant on demand.
It should be noted that the leisure cafe should not compete with the commercial offers as
this would diminish the demand and potentially the leisure cafe should become a leased
outlets to provide for instance a Costa coffee.
It should also be noted that the adjacent Skills Centre already includes a food offer.
53
Bowling
It is recognised with the loss of Ocean Bowling at Ravenside that there is public demand to
see a new bowling facility as part of the development.
Ocean Bowling was 24 lanes and this was not commercially sustainable. However, a
smaller 6-8 lane ‘boutique’ bowling centre may just be commercially viable but would not create signiicant value to the Council as the bowling proit margins would only just cover the capitalisation of the building cost (as highlighted in 3.1). For bowling this relects the assessment summarised in section 2.8 and detailed in the business case if delivered as
part of the sports centre operation.
Therefore the key decision for the Council would be whether a bowling hall is to be
provided, and if so, whether they would wish this to be operated as part of the leisure
centre or try and to attract a separate operator.
We highlight that if the bowling hall were integrated lexibly if it did not succeed that the space could be turned into another activity - for instance a 6-8 lane bowling hall could accommodate a 5-a-side centre, studio space or a restaurant.
Cinema
Whilst a cinema would act as an additional draw, and would greatly assist creating an
attractive destination which would potentially attract restaurant operators, it is advised
that it is unlikely to be operationally inancially successful. At this stage a cinema has therefore been discounted. If the Council wished to explore this further then an operator
could be asked to provide a business case assessment on the site.
Summary
The commercial assessment suggests there are a range of potential options that would
need to be considered by the masterplan and future detailed assessment from a modest
commercial offer, to mid, and through to a high commercial density.
Modest Commercial Mix
• Leisure Centre
• Leisure Centre Cafe (leased)
• Bowling (either as commercial
or part of sports centre)
• Car Park (c.150 spaces)
• Townhouses and Apartments to
the remainder of the site.
Mid-level Commercial Mix
• Leisure Centre
• Leisure Centre Cafe (leased)
• Hotel or apartments
• 1-2 Restaurants• Bowling (either as commercial
or part of sports centre)
• Car Park (c.150 spaces)
• Townhouses to the remainder of
the site.
High Density Commercial Mix
• Leisure Centre
• Leisure Centre Cafe (leased)
• Hotel
• Apartments
• 2-3 Restaurants• Bowling (commercial)
• Cinema (commercial)
• Large Car Park (c.250 spaces+)
• Townhouses to the NW corner
of the site
54
Scale Comparison of Jersey Waterfront
and the Bexhill Down Masterplan site.
55
Site Masterplanning
56
Option 1 Option 2
Option 3
Approximate front entrance position
Focal plaza
Building zones could be rotated
Leisure Centre Building Zone
Leisure Car Park
Commercial Building Zone
Residential Zone
57
Masterplan Options4.0Three principle development options have been considered as follows and illustrated
opposite-
Option 1: The frontage zone contains the new leisure centre together with associated car parking with central zone commercial / residential (apartments) development. The coniguration of the leisure centre and car park to the frontage is variable.
Option 2: The leisure centre is located in the central zone with the frontage zone used for car parking and commercial / residential (apartments) to the eastern edge .
Option 3: The frontage zone contains a combined leisure centre and commercial development with the central zone accommodating the associated car parking.
The development options deliver the range of commercial mix summarised in the section
4.4 as follows:-
Option 1 - provides a modest commercial mix
Option 2 - provides a mid-level commercial mix
Option 3 - provides a high-density commercial mix
To all options residential is consistently shown to the NW corner zone as this is the only reasonable use for this area and due to the proximity to neighbouring residential
properties, on Bancroft Road and Newlands Avenue, 3-storey townhouses are deemed an appropriate development.
For the purposes of testing the feasibility masterplan options the approximate 4000sqm
leisure centre footprint (equivalent to the core model facility) has been used together with
350sqm for the Drill Hall and 150 car parking spaces for the sports centre.
The diagrams demonstrate that the frontage site is approximately double the central zone area creating 3 zones of equal size each equivalent in size to the leisure centre or 150 car parking spaces.
Options 1,2 and 3 have been explored and appraised at feasibility level as detailed over
the following pages.
Some of the key determinants of selecting a preferred masterplan are:-
• Creates a leisure destination
• Has a strong urban design relationship to town and park context
• Allows a lagship / iconic leisure provision to be created and have a gateway presence at the road intersection.
• Maximises the potential land use and value including consideration for areas where
additional building height would be acceptable.
• Ability to avoid the culvert route or to create value which exceeds the cost of
realigning.
• Flexibility to accommodate different potential commercial mixes and associated car
parking requirements.
• Ability to allow coach turning within the site for the school and sports centre.
58
Option 1 Feasibility Scale and
Layout Testing
60
Option 1A Option 1B
61
The sketches opposite indicate a number of alternative
illustrative layout approaches for option 1 and show
that this option could be interpreted in a number of
ways which deliver quite varying masterplan solutions.
Option 1A
Whilst locating the leisure building east-west with the car park to the front would not create signiicant street presence and would conceal the Skills Centre and the
footpath link, from the underpass / bus interchange, it
does allow a good opportunity to locate commercial
elements on the street corner, allows lexibility for the commercial area to be developed seperately and to
suit demand. The commercial area could be reduced
to avoid the culvert or cantilever over it, and could link
to the leisure centre if required. The layout allows the
residential development layout to be rationally laid out
behind the sports centre. The sketch plan shows that
it would be possible to break centrally the building to
create visual links through to the Skills Centre frontage
and a central internal foyer space.
Option 1B
Locating the leisure building to the eastern edge would
create a excellent site response, street presence, form
a strong edge to the park and gateway entrance from
the town centre. However, the culvert would require to
be realigned and the position of the commercial block
may be restricted to restaurants/leisure as it may be
too deep into the site to attract a hotel. In this case the
option would evolve into option 1C.
Option 1C
To avoid the culvert altogether the leisure centre
would need to be located as effectively a large
pavilion building to the centre of the frontage site. The
sketches show this literally as a circular form though
the facility could be shaped differently dependant
on the facilities within. The approach would create a
signiicant architectural statement if handled well and respond well to the park setting, street presence and
gateway building vision. It would be possible to enlarge
the pavilion to amalgamate commercial elements such
as bowling / restaurants as part of the facility off a
shared hub foyer which could run through the centre or
external space.
For option 1 we suggest all options have positive
aspects and could be developed into appropriate
masterplan solutions for the site. The extent of
commercial demand and the potential to move the
culvert will be deining factors in the deliverability of the options. If the culvert cannot be realigned
options 1A (with mid level commercial) and 1C (modest
commercial) are viable. If the culvert can be realigned
cost effectively then 1B becomes a viable masterplan
response.
Option 1C
62
Option 2 Feasibility Scale and
Layout Testing
64
Option 2A Option 2B
65
The sketches opposite indicate a number of alternative
illustrative layout approaches for option 2. The options
highlight that the leisure centre could be incrementally
moved forward which would start to create a changing
relationship with the frontage buildings particularly if
they had commercial elements within.
Option 2A
Locating the leisure building directly in the central site
with development blocks stepping up to the corner
frontage form a strong legible layout to the overall
site. The sketch 3Ds suggest that the corner block
could warrant being expressed as a linchpin tower
element to the corner. The sketch layout plan suggests
that commercial leisure elements could be created
at ground level N/S suficient in scale to include 2no modest restaurants and a 6-lane ten-pin bowling hall.
Option 2B
The leisure building could be moved forward with a
cranked frontage to create a stronger relationship
to the frontage development, the route up London
Road from the town centre, and the pedestrian link
between the bus interchange/underpass, sports centre
and school. Additionally the corner block could be
expressed more dynamically to ‘contain’ the site and
be cantilevered / staddle over the culvert where the
connecting route beneath is formed. The layout would
still allow commercial leisure elements to be created
at ground level though positively against the cranked
route. The route into the Skill Centre car park would
need to be ammended potentially sweeping all the way
around the commercial or from the north.
Option 2C
The leisure building could be moved further forward to
create a more contained public space with the frontage
development wrapping around. However, this would
create a solid edge to the BHLR, would probably loose
the ability to create commercial leisure elements,
would conceal the skill centre and rely on the skills
centre access from the north of the leisure centre.
This option would reduce the level of apartments, and
value, to the frontage in lieu of additional townhouses
to the north.
For option 2 the recommended response would be
between 2A and 2B.
Option 2C
66
Option 3 Feasibility Scale and
Layout Testing
68
Option 3A Option 3B
69
The sketches opposite indicate the optional
illustrative rotational and height potential of the
option 3 feasibility masterplan.
Option 3A
The most viable scenario for this development
options is with two storeys of commercial leisure
and the two-storey sports centre sweeping up to the 5-storey hotel at the NW corner. This arrangement would create a dynamic and iconic gateway
development. However, the development is high-density and feels less comfortable against the school
and in the park context.
Option 3B
Shows the alternative of apartments above a single
storey of commercial leisure. A strong dynamic
relationship can be formed with the two-storey sports centre. However, the scale of development
feels too dense for the site and town.
Option 3C
Simply relects option 3B locating the lower sports building to the western school side of the site. The
scale of the development look increasingly too dense
with the high apartment block to the eastern BHLR
side.
For option 3 the recommended response would be
3A. However, we advise that this type, extent and
scale of set-piece development would probably not be achievable.
Option 3C
A higher apartment development as option 3B and 3C is
considered potentially too dense a development for the
site and town.
71
Masterplan 1C
73
Masterplan 1A
75
Masterplan 2C
76
All the layout proposals allow the creation of a
double-height cafe foyer which addresses the key activities and contains the vertical circulation.
77
Design Principles
78
Leisure Centre Layout Principles5.0The feasibility options review suggests alternative positions and layouts for the leisure
facility. In all cases the future detailed development and reinement of the inal selected masterplan will always lead to reinement and changes to the leisure centre design,
footprint and layout from the sketch schemes as the illustrative layouts.
However, with each of the feasibility development options the internal building layout of
the leisure centre has been tested and with each we believe a quality leisure facility and
design can be created. The following principles have been used:
• A double foyer hub with a glazed frontage to an external or internal plaza space has been created with activity spaces directly off.
• Vertical circulation is provided within the foyer hub area to provide movement and
animation to the space.
• The foyer hub exploits visual connections wherever possible into the activity spaces to
animate the space, engage with the street, and act as a shop front to the facilities within.
• The layouts are simple, clear and legible which use the hub for the circulation with
minimal corridor space.
• Coniguring the double height pool hall to the frontage to act as a shop front and the solid sports hall generally to the back of the facility.
• Pool spectator seating is conigured at ground level stepping down to poolside accessible directly from the cafe foyer.
• The sports hall is accessed directly off the foyer hub to allow it to be more accessible
and open as a community hall.
• Squash courts are semi-sunken and accessed by stepping down spectator seats from ground level.
• Positioning the itness suite at an upper level overlooking the external realm, pool hall and to create an upper shop frontage to the facility.
• The two studios are positioned side-by-side allowing the option to provide a sliding acoustic partition to create a large studio space.
• Provide a servicing route to the outside perimeter for pool chemical delivery,
maintenance, and emergency vehicle access.
• The layout principles would allow the MoD accommodation to be separately accessed
or segregated when required with lexibility to marry with any shared facilities.
79
Option 15.1The option 2 masterplan creates a pavilion building to the centre of the frontage with
a modest commercial element. The building shape could literally be circular with the
commercial elements subsumed or expressed as two separate buildings.
Option 1B creates a shared hub space between a modest commercial element and the
sports centre this space could be internal or external. The commercial space could
accommodate bowling or restaurants at ground level with either a 4-storey hotel above or another restaurant level (alternative shown). The sport centre has a double height foyer
with the pool hall to the frontage, squash and sports hall directly off.
Option 1C creates a single building broken with a street with a wet and dry
accommodation lanking either side. The reception sits at the centre and controls access to the wet and dry changing, the sports hall and circulation upstairs which would allow
the street space to be openly accessible from each end and have a dynamic relationship
to all the activities within. Externally the pool hall and squash area could be glazed and optionally the sports hall could have a clerestrorey glazed base.
With both options an area for the Drill Hall accommodation is allowed and this could be
bowling (as shown)
Option 1B Option 1B
Bowling
alternative
Restaurant
alternative
or Drill Hall
80
Option 25.2The option 2 masterplan creates a linear leisure centre which, due to the width of the
central zone, would require a linear central spine street with activities lanking either side.
The pool hall would be located at the front, potentially cranked or shaped, to respond to
the urban realm and commercial development. Alongside the pool hall it is suggested the
cafe is created within a double height foyer space with direct access to spectator seating
and a poolside cafe terrace. The reception and cafe servery would then sit at the end of
the double cafe space controlling access deeper into the facility.
Beyond reception the spine route would lead to a central vertical circulation node which
would also highlight the entrance to the dry and wet changing facilities. To the end of
the spine the space opens up again into the squash courts, which are semi sunken with
spectator seats down, and the sports hall creating a waiting and viewing area.
Upstairs the itness suite and studios lank the vertical circulation node with the itness suite overlooking the pool. Meeting spaces are shown set above the reception. The
upstairs layout could be conigured in alternative ways.
To accommodate the Drill Hall and/or bowling the spine corridor could be extended. If
these facilities are not included the sports hall could be rotated to act as a focal endpoint
to the spine.
It is envisaged that the street would be top lit with suficient width, utilising the circulation node void and spectator seats, to not feel like a corridor.
The principles of this building layout could alternatively be lipped vertically to locate the pool and sports hall to the west particularly if the sports hall were to have a clerestorey
81
Option 35.3The option 3 masterplan would allow the leisure centre double height foyer to become
an internal extension of the external plaza. The foyer would contain the cafe, vertical cirulation and provide direct links to squash viewing and sports hall as option 1B. The pool
hall, with itness overlooking, would create a beacon shop-window to the corner of the site. The pool hall would wrap around the corner to address the BHLR junction and the upper level itness would address the road as it rises to irst loor level.
The commercial development would contain hotel foyer, restaurants and bowling at
ground level with the hotel bedrooms and a cinema above or alternatively apartments
above.
82
Horsham Pool by FaulknerBrowns
83
Financial Appraisal and Delivery Options
86
Procurement Options and Recommendations6.2There are four key procurement routes that could be used by the Council for the
development as follows. All options allow the Council to procure via a tendered ixed price contract process based on a set of clearly deined employers requirements / contract proposals. A 10% Client contingency is allowed in the preliminary cost plan for additional
costs to the Client such as changes or unforeseen events.
COUNCIL LED
Process
The Council is responsible for the overall delivery of the leisure centre and retains control
of the process and design. The Council would need to competitively market and sell the
development plots for the highest possible value and then add to this further additional
capital to meet the shortfall. The Council would then separately procure design team,
contractor and operator would then need to follow the OJEU public procurement process
or via an existing public framework.
How
The project would be delivered under a traditional contract or either a single or two stage design and build process. We recommend that the design be developed under a single stage
D&B process where the Client would procure a design team to develop the design and cost planning to RIBA D+ stage at which point the contractor would be procured via another
OJEU process of prequaliication and tender upon this design and the contractor selected on a ixed price. The design team would be novated to the contractor to complete the design. The council would need to seperately tender for an operator for the new facility.
Key Issues and Risks
With this option the Council retains the overall risk for delivery, would fund all stages of the
project, and is also most likely to be the most expensive option.
By directly selling the commercial development sites the process would create the least
value and also, as the Council is directly and transparently selling the development plots,
overage is more likely to be payable to ESCC.
OPERATOR LED
Process
The Council appoints an operator for the leisure centre on the basis of a Design, Build,
Operate and Manage (DBOM) form of procurement. The operator becomes the single entity
with overall responsibility for delivering the new leisure centre who would separately
appoint a design team and seek a development partner to bring forward the enabling
commercial development. The Council would be required to fund the shortfall between the
development value and overall cost of delivering the scheme.
How
The Council appoints the operator via an OJEU public procurement process using either
restricted, negotiated or competitive dialogue routes.
The restricted and negotiated routes are more applicable in circumstances where the
Council is clear on what exactly is being procured as they do not allow a great deal of
interaction with the tenderers. Therefore we believe a competitive dialogue process would
be more applicable for the Council in respect of the leisure centre project as it allows the Council to liaise with the bidders and discuss directly elements such as design, funding and
legals. It should be noted that a competitive dialogue process will take at least 1 year to
complete.
Key Issues and Risks
The overall delivery and funding for the project is reliant on the enabling development and so we believe that it is high risk relying on this element through an operator rather than the
Council having direct control over the appointment of the developer. Additionally, there is a
limited number of commercial leisure operators that would be capable of taking on a DBOM
contract of this nature therefore reducing the overall level of competition.
87
DEVELOPER LED
Process
As the operator led process with the Council appointing a developer to take overall
responsibility for the whole site including the delivery of the leisure centre from start to
inish. The leisure centre is delivered through proceeds from the enabling development together with a capital contribution from the Council to meet any shortfall.
This option allows the overall site to be brought forward in a cohesive masterplan in which
the site value is deined, maximised with potential amalgamation between the commercial and leisure development. It is important that the developer establishes the potential
commercial value at the outset to allow the leisure centre funding to be conirmed.
How
As outlined in the operator led solution, the developer would be appointed through an OJEU
procurement process and, for the same reasons, we believe that the competitive dialogue
procedure would be most appropriate for the Council. Typically it would be expected that
as part of the competitive dialogue process, the short listed developers would take the
design through to RIBA Stage C before appointment. This allows ample opportunity for
the Council to assess and comment on the quality and suitability of the design solution as
part of the selection dialogue process. The council would need to seperately tender for an
operator for the new facility.
Key Issues and Risks
Developers are well placed to manage design and construction works as well as maximising
the commercial returns from a site. Consideration will need to be given to how any
shortfall in commercial value is funded and therefore as securing early quantiication is fundamental. In order to protect the Council’s requirements either in terms of facilities
or design quality a robust output brief, speciications and design parameters should be provided as part of the procurement process.
ALTERNATIVE FRAMEWORK OPTION (CONTRACTOR LED)
One potential alternative option for the Council to utilise a public sector framework which
is available to all local authorities and based on pre-agreed tendered rates. A common framework used is the national Scape framework where Willmott Dixon are currently the
sole contractor.
How
Under the framework process Willmott Dixon would appoint an appropriate design team
as well as a development partner to develop the design to the approval stages set out in
the framework. Each stage would be developed in close collaboration with the Council in
regard to design and cost.
Key Issues and Risks
The process offers signiicant savings in time and resource from the Council as it greatly reduces the procurement timescale. The process also allows the Council to overview and
comment on the the design evolvement through the close collaborative working process
to assure their quality and speciications requirements are embodied into the contract proposals. The council would need to seperately tender for an operator for the new facility.
However, this option needs to be balanced against the importance and signiicance of the project to the Council and the need to achieve best value in all areas to the highest possible standards.
Recommendation
Ultimately the Council wish to have control of design quality in parallel with maximising
the site value. Therefore we suggest a procurement strategy which has a developer lead,
to maximise value, and design controlled by robust design parameters set by the Council
with formal dialogue as part of the process. Therefore we recommend that a competitive
developer led procedure or a framework process (with the prerequisite that a developer
is formally integrated part of the delivery team) are the relevant options that should be
considered for this development.
84
85
Appendix 1
Leisure Centre Operational Financial
Business Report
NEW LEISURE CENTRE – FINANCIAL AND LEISURE REPORT
ROTHER DISTRICT COUNCIL
A
REPORT
BY
FMG CONSULTING LTD
AUGUST 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ................................... ................................................... ...... 3
2. Supply and Demand .............................. ................................................... . 12
3. Project Options ................................ ................................................... .... 23
4. Capital Costs .................................. ................................................... ..... 24
5. Business Plans ................................. ................................................... ..... 27
6. Financial Modelling and Affordability .......... ................................................... 38
Appendices
Appendix A - Competition Analysis
Appendix B - Latent Demand Assessment from Leisure Database Company
Appendix C - Business Plan – Basic Scheme
Appendix C - Business Plan – Core Scheme
Appendix D - Marginal Cost of Supplementary Items
1. Introduction
Introduction
1.1 The Council have engaged Faulkner Brown Architects and FMG Consulting to undertake a feasibility study on the development of a new leisu re centre and enabling development on the site of the existing Bexhill Leisure Centre.
1.2 As part of the feasibility study, FMG Consulting ha ve reviewed the demographics of the catchment area, review the current performance of e ach of the current facilities, establish the projected demand for the different leisure faci lity types, develop new facility mix options, and undertake the financial modelling of e ach option and compare this to the current financial budget of the Council.
Local demographics
1.3 This section reviews the local demographics of the district and the catchment of Bexhill Town:
• Rother District demographics;
• Bexhill-on-Sea town demographics;
• Demographics of a 20 minute catchment of the site.
1.4 The district of Rother has a population of 90,588 (Census 2011), of which circa 76,000 people are over the age of 16 years (84.3%). According to the figures, there are a higher proportion of people when compared to the average for England in Rother in all age groups 45 years and above. The people aged 45 years and over combines t o 57.7% of the total population which is significantly higher than the national average of 4 1.8%. All of the age groups below 45 years old are below the national average including the ke y target ages of 16-44 years for sport and physical exercise. Therefore, the district of Rother has an ageing population.
Obesity across the District
1.5 In terms of obesity, the Sport England Active People Survey data suggests that the number of adults in Rother that are classified as obese is ci rca 50,700 or 63.9% of the adult population. This is slightly above the national average for Eng land where it is estimated that 63.8% of the population are deemed to be obese in addition to al so being above the regional average of 63.1% in the South East.
1.6 In terms of children, the level of child obesity is 18.3%, which is below the national average of 19.2% but above the regional average for the Sou th East of 16.5%.
Life Expectancy
1.7 Life expectancy in Rother is above the national ave rages for both males and females. Adults are expected to live on average of 79.9 years which is slightly below the South East average of 80.0 years but above the national average of 78. 6 years.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 4
Economic Inactivity
1.8 In terms of unemployment as a proportion of the economically active, the district of Rother has 2,019 people (3.2%) unemployed from the 39,859 adults that are economically active, which is lower than both the South East regional (3 .4%) and national (4.4%) averages. This is positive in terms of disposable income available to participate in leisure activities.
Sport England Key Performance Indicators for Rother
1.9 Sport England, the Governments agency for sport measure 5 key areas in relation to sport activity. The table below sets out the performance of the district compared to the South East and England.
Table 1.1 - Comparison with Sport England KPIs
Rother South East England
KPI1 – 1x30 mins Physical Activity per week
30.7% 36.9% 35.7%
KPI2 - Volunteering at least one hour a week
4.9% 7.1% 6.0%
KPI3 - Club Membership in the last 4 weeks
18.4% 24.3% 21.0%
KPI4 – Received tuition / coaching in last 12 months
17.6% 18.1% 15.8%
KPI5 - Took part in organised competition in last 12 months
11.9% 14.2% 11.2%
Above regional and national averages
Above national average but not regional average
Below regional and national averages
1.10 It can be seen by the figures in the table above th at the district is currently underperforming in all of the five KPIs. They are all below the reg ional average with only two of the KPIs above the national average. Consequently, KPI1 (phy sical activity for 1x30 mins participation a week) is significantly below both averages at 30. 7% compared to the South East (36.9%) and England (35.7%). This is concerning for the distric t with sedentary lifestyles potentially leading to health issues and a more obese district.
1.11 The results are also negative in terms of participation in physical activity at any proposed new centre. Alternatively, a new centre may help to attract new users helping to increase participation. The area also has an ageing populati on; therefore it is important that pricing and programming is regularly monitored in order to attract the older populations.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 5
1.12 In terms of trends between 2009 and 2013, the table overleaf shows these for each of the five key performance indicators, the colours (green above and red below) represent the change from the previous year, with green indicatin g a positive increase and red a decrease in performance.
Table 1.2 - Trends for Rother in Sport England KPIs
Indicator 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
KPI1 - 1x30 mins Physical Activity per week observed
31.5% 30.6% 32.0% 30.7%
KPI2 - Volunteering at least one hour a week
1.7% 9.9% N/A* 4.9%
KPI3 – Club Membership in the last 4 weeks
26.1% 23.5% 19.1% 18.4%
KPI4 – Received tuition / coaching in last 12 months
15.5% 14.5% 12.8% 17.6%
KPI5 - Took part in organised competition in last 12 months
14.5% 17.3% 12.1% 11.9%
*indicates that data has been suppressed by Sport E ngland due to the sample size
1.13 It can be seen that in 2012/13 (the last published measured year, Active People Survey 7), all of the KPIs decrease from the previous set of results except KPI4 (receiving tuition and coaching in the last 12 months). These downward tre nds in the results are reflected in the poor comparison to national and the regional averages in the latest 2012/13 results in table 1.1 above.
1.14 Table 1.2 also shows that the KPI1 (1 x 30 minutes participation) figures had initially increased over the previous set of results but then reduced again, moving further away from the regional and national averages.
Demographics of Bexhill-on-Sea
1.15 Bexhill-on-Sea is a coastal town in district of Rother in East Sussex, located to the east of Eastbourne and Brighton and to the west of Hastings . According to the Census 2011, the population of the town of Bexhill-on-Sea is 43,107, an increase of 6.1% in population from 40,495 in the Census 2001.
1.16 Bexhill-on-Sea can be accessed via both road and ra il. It is located on the A259 road which forms the coast road between Folkestone and Brighton, while a new Hastings to Bexhill bypass is currently being built, located next to th e site of the proposed new Bexhill Leisure Centre. Bexhill is served by the coastal railway li ne between Ashford and Brighton and has
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 6
three railway stations; Cooden Beach, Collington, and Bexhill. Regular trains run to Brighton, Ashford and London from Bexhill.
20 minute Catchment Analysis around the proposed new site
1.17 The table below shows the population of the 20 minu te drive time catchment surrounding the proposed new Bexhill Leisure Centre site.
Table 1.3 - 20 Minute drive time catchment around the new Bexhill Leisure Centre site
Age 0-2.5 2.5-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 Total
0-14 years 2,997 2,603 3,495 10,498 13,325 32,918
15-24 years 2,117 1,724 2,658 7,714 8,629 22,842
25-39 years 2,988 2,168 3,879 11,098 12,038 32,171
40-59 years 5,212 4,502 6,358 17,597 20,298 53,967
60-79 years 5,216 5,828 4,916 12,668 16,646 45,274
80+ years 2,327 2,560 1,761 3,438 4,594 14,680
Total 20,857 19,385 23,067 63,013 75,530 201,852
1.18 As the table above shows, there is circa 202,000 pe ople within a 20 minute drive time of the new site without taking into account the new bypass . The catchment expands into the whole of Hastings and Battle as well as a large proportion of Eastbourne. The largest population group is the 40-59 years where there 54,000 people (26.7% of the population). Some of this population group will have propensity to participate, however, the ideal age groups for participation are the 15-24 and 25-39 years age gro ups. In combination, there is circa 55,000 people (27.3%) in these age groups.
1.19 The majority of the population in the catchment liv e over 10 minutes away from the site with circa 139,000 of the 202,000 above the 10 minu te threshold (68.6%). This is due, as previously mentioned, to the catchment reaching the Eastbourne, Hastings and Battle. There are only circa 40,000 people within 5 minutes of th e site.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 7
Market Segmentation
1.20 Sport England market segmentation data models parti cular groups and provides information on sporting behaviours and attitudes as well as mot ivations for and barriers to taking part in sport. This research builds upon the Active People Survey, the Department for Culture Media and Sport's Taking Part Survey and the Mosaic tool from Experian.
1.21 There are 19 market segments have been created from an analysis of the English population (18+ years). Each segment exhibits distinct charact eristics, with information covering specific sports that people take part in and reason s why people do sport, together with the level of interest in and barriers to doing more sport.
1.22 By applying this information to demographic and soc io-economic data for the district, the model is able to estimate the likely behaviour and activity patterns of residents within the catchment. In addition to being used to determine w hich types of facilities are most appropriate to meet resident's needs, the model can also be used as a prerequisite to any intervention programmes to facilitate greater activ ity levels.
1.23 The table below illustrates the market segmentation for a 12km as the crow flies catchment (equating to 20 minutes’ drive time) and compares t he results to the national average. The following colour codes have been used in the table:
% of the population is higher than the national av erage for that group
Top 5 groups that have the highest proportion of the population within the catchment area
Table 1.4 - Market Segmentation Analysis for 12km catchment
Segment Name Age band
Catchment Catchment
% England % Preferred Activities
1 – Competitive Male (Urban) Ben 18 – 26 5,323 4.1% 4.9% High intensity activities, weight lifting, competitive court games and technical sports
2 – Team Drinker Jamie 18 –25 5,982 4.5% 5.5% Team sports (e.g. football), combat sports and weight training
3 – Fitness Class Friend Chloe 18 – 25 4,796 3.6% 4 .7% Exercise classes, individual activities, team games, swimming and gym
4 – Supportive Single Leanne 18 –25 4,758 3.6% 4.3% Social activities, swimming and keep fit classes
5 – Career Focused Female Helena 26 – 35 5,830 4.4% 4.5% Very active, keep fit and gym related activities, winter sports and swimming and likely to have private gym membership
6 – Settling Down Male Tim 26 – 35 9,436 7.2% 8.8%
Very active, technical sports, skiing, water sports, team games, individual activities, personal fitness and likely to have private gym membership
7 – Stay at Home Mums Alison 36 – 45 4,863 3.7% 4.4 % Keep fit classes, racquet sports, swimming and likely to have private gym membership
8 – Middle England Mum Jackie 36 -45 6,305 4.8% 4.9 % Visiting leisure facilities for swimming and may take children bowling or ice skating
9 – Pub League Kev 36 -45 5,145 3.9% 5.9% Team sports, football, combat sports, low intensity social activities (e.g. darts)
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 9
Segment Name Age band
Catchment Catchment
% England % Preferred Activities
10 – Stretched Single Mum Paula 26 -35 3,655 2.8% 3 .7% Social activities, 10 pin bowling and low intensity
11 – Comfortable Mid Life Male
Philip 46 – 55 11,523 8.8% 8.6% Team sports, racquet sports, technical sports, fitness club member and competitive sports
12 – Empty Nest Career Ladies Elaine 46 – 55 8,973 6.8% 6.1% Swimming, exercise classes, gym and walking
13 – Early Retirement Couples Roger &
Joy 56 – 65 12,841 9.8% 6.8%
Walking, swimming, table tennis, golf and keep fit classes.
14 – Older Working Female Brenda 46 -65 5,289 4.0% 4.9% Swimming, walking, keep fit and cycling
15 – Local Old Boy Terry 56 -65 4,581 3.5% 3.7% Low intensity, walking, fishing, darts and pool
16 – Later life Woman Norma 56 -65 2,541 1.9% 2.1% Walking and low intensity activities
17 – Comfortable Retired Couples
Ralph & Phyllis
65+ 7,873 6.0% 4.2% Swimming, fishing, golf, lower intensity and bowls
18 – Twilight Year Man Frank* 66+ 7,643 5.8% 4.0% Individual and peer activities, walking, bowls, golf, darts, pool, swimming
19 – Retirement Home Single Elsie & Arnold*
66+ 14,138 10.8% 8.0% Low intensity, bowls, walking and dancing
1.24 It can be seen that the prevalent segments in the c atchment district are 6, 11, 12, 13, and 19. These groups preferred activities include; team sports, health and fitness, low intensity activities, swimming and walking. Out of the key se gments 1 to 6 who have a higher propensity to participate in physical activity, onl y Tim (segment 6) is included in the top 5 prevalent segments.
1.25 One of the key issues in this segmentation analysis is that the main income drivers for sport and leisure facilities are health and fitness membe rships and swimming. Segments 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12 and possibly 14 are more likely to utilise gy m and exercise facilities. As can be seen in Table 1.4, Tim (segment 6) and Elaine (segment 12) are prevalent segments in the catchment for health and fitness, however, none of the other segments that are ideal for health and fitness are above the national average. Therefore, this is challenging in terms of health and fitness participation. Programming and p ricing will be vital to attracting additional users to the new centre, especially thos e in older generations.
1.26 When analysing propensity for swimming, segments 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17 and 18 states that swimming is a preferred activity but segments 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, are more likely to use the pools as a secondary facility alongside their gym membership or exercise classes. Therefore 13, 14, 17 and 18 are likely to use the p ools as a primary visit with Roger and Joy (segment 13) the only prevalent segment in the catc hment. However, segment 17 (Ralph & Phyllis) and segment 18 (Frank) are not prevalent s egments but they above the national average and they both enjoy swimming participation. Therefore, there is good propensity for swimming in the catchment.
1.27 The largest segment in the catchment is Elsie and A rnold (segment 19) who are mainly aged 66 years and above and are retired and widowed. The y live on their own in warden controlled sheltered accommodation. Due to their ag e, they cannot drive but will walk to the post office to collect their pension. They are much less active than the adult population. When they participation, they enjoy keep fit/gym, s wimming, bowls and golf.
1.28 Roger & Joy (segment 13) are generally aged 56-65 y ears, married and either in full time employment or retired. They are slightly less active than the national average, with keep fit/gym, swimming, cycling and golf as the most expected activities that Roger and Joy will participate in.
1.29 Comfortable mid-life male, Phillip, segment 11 is aged 46-55 years. He is interested in a variety of sports including team, racquet, technica l and competitive sports. Philip wants to stay healthy for later in life, and despite his age he can be classed as a ‘sporty segment’. His activity levels are above average and Philip enjoys participating in cycling, keep fit/gym, swimming and football.
1.30 Tim, segment 6, a 'settling down male' who is mainl y aged 26-45 years, married or single and may have children. Tim is a busy professional but i s an active person who enjoys exercise on a regular basis such as cycling, gym/keep fit, swimming and football.
1.31 Finally, Elaine (segment 12) is mid-life professional who has more time since her children left home. She is married and mainly aged 46-55 years ol d. Elaine’s sporting activity levels are consistent with the national average, and slightly above average for some indicators. She also eats healthy meals but also enjoys a glass of red wine in the evening after work. Elaine’s preferable activities include keep fit/gym, swimmin g, cycling and athletics.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 11
Summary
• The district of Rother has a population of 90,588 (Census 2011), of which circa 76,000 people are over the age of 16 years (84.3%). All age groups under 45 years old are below the national average so Rother has an ageing population.
• Unemployment is lower than national and regional av erage. Life expectancy is above the national average but below the South East avera ge while obesity in adults is higher than the averages.
• Comparison with Sport England Key Performance Indicators across sport and participation shows Rother scores lower than all national averages and these have generally decreased from previous years.
• The catchment population within 20 minute drive tim e from the new site is circa 202,000 of which 55,000 are between 15 and 39 years of age (our target market) with 33,000 under 15 years of age.
• The majority of the population is located after 10 minutes with 139,000 of the 202,000 located in this bracket. This is due to the drive time catchment reaching Eastbourne, Battle and Hastings.
• Market segmentation suggests that the largest group s within the District are Tim (26 – 35 years), Philip (46 – 55 years), Elaine (empty nest, age 46-55), Roger & Joy (early retirement couples, 56 – 65 years) and Elsie & Arno ld (retired couples and singles, 65 years old plus).
2. Supply and Demand
Introduction
2.1 In order to access the viability of the different f acility types, we have sought to establish the supply and demand within the catchment linked to th e scale and uniqueness of the offer under the different facility packages. A summary of the market supply is included in Appendix A to this report.
2.2 The facilities covered include:
• Health and fitness
• Swimming pool water and Leisure water
• Sports halls
• Soft play
• Squash
• Ten pin bowling
• Climbing and bouldering
• Spa
Health and Fitness
2.3 The proposed new facility will have plans for a new health and fitness suite and studio(s). Currently, both of the facilities have gyms; Bexhil l Leisure Centre has 75 stations and Bexhill Leisure Pool has 20 stations combining to a total o f 95 stations. The total membership across the board is 1,666 which equates to 18 members per station, which is below the industry average of 25 members per station.
2.4 This is reflected in the financial performances of both sites in comparison to our FMG benchmark. Our FMG benchmark figure comes from our internal database of hundreds of pieces of information from across the UK which we can filter to show a variety of variables such as management operator type (trust, private co ntractor, in house).
2.5 In the last financial figures 2012/13, Bexhill Leis ure Centre produced £[REMOVED] per station in
income while Bexhill Leisure Pool generated only £[REMOVED]. These are both [REMOVED] our benchmark for trusts of £7,900 per station. Therefo re, this suggests that the gym at the new centre needs to be smaller than the current 95 stat ions. In order to identify the required size of the gym at the facility, The Leisure Database Co mpany (TLDC) provided a report on the projected demand for fitness within the catchment a rea.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 13
Latent Demand
2.6 Demand for health and fitness has been determined f rom information provided by TLDC. For the purposes of health and fitness, the TLDC have u tilised a 3 mile drive time. The catchment area for the site was determined based on a number of factors which include a map review, where competitors are located, where cl usters of population live and where TLDC think people would realistically travel to whi lst also trying to limit too much overlap with similar facilities.
2.7 Health and fitness uses catchment areas to establis h the likely potential users of a particular site. This can also depend upon the quality and the pricing of the facilities. TLDC have used a 3 mile catchment to establish the likely user pen etration (or propensity to participate) for health and fitness using Mosaic, which is the world 's most widely used geo-demographic population segmentation system.
2.8 Mosaic UK classifies the population, using very small geographical areas such as a single postcode, into 61 different types, which are in tur n aggregated into 11 broader groups. Over 400 different data variables have been used in its creation, making it the most accurate and up to date way of identifying and describing popula tion trends within the UK population. It is sourced both from the regular Census and also from other dynamic sources such as the Electoral Roll, consumer credit activity, the Post Office Address File, house prices and council tax information, all updated annually.
2.9 TLDC has combined the Mosaic System with the postco des of millions of health & fitness members to build up the largest ever profile of what sort of people are - and are not - participating in fitness. This helps to demonstrate where there has been a relatively high take up for fitness (i.e. a high proportion of a particular Mosaic group or type) or where only a small proportion of inhabitants of a particular k ind have participated, usually for social or economic reasons. These are the penetration rates f or the various Mosaic groups / types.
2.10 TLDC proceeds to use these current levels of partic ipation across the various Mosaic groups and types - 'penetration rates' - to make accurate assessments of the unmet ('latent') demand for health & fitness in a given catchment area, bui lding in allowance for current and future competition, and, where relevant, new housing devel opment. Those Mosaic types with the highest penetration rates are said to be the kind o f people with the 'highest propensity' to participate.
Demographics and the Catchment Area
2.11 At the moment (due to the building of the bypass), a 10 minute drive around the new site fans out predominantly along the A259, from Hooe in the west to Bulverhythe, 3 miles away at the gateway to St Leonards on Sea, in the east. It also heads North West up the A269 to Ninfield and Lower Street. There is very little coverage to the North East, towards Crowhurst and Green Street.
2.12 Using a 3 mile radius around the new centre anticip ates the better access of which the new link road will eventually give in that direction, w hile excluding some of those living just over 3 miles to the East, who may realistically be more in the orbit of providers in the St Leonards and Hastings area. Within this 3 mile radius there are 47,593 people.
2.13 According to TLDC, Bexhill has a reputation as a re tirement centre and a large proportion of the catchment population falls into two segments, w hich will create particular challenges in terms of programming and equipment mix. There are more than 29% of the population that fall into Mosaic group E (Active Retirement). These are mostly older people who enjoy
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 14
sufficient pensions and savings to choose pleasant locations for their retirement with many of these people will be in their 60s and 70s.
2.14 The other Mosaic group which is prevalent in large numbers is D (Small Town Diversity) which accounts for over a quarter of the total. This contains many people whose study, work or weekly lifestyle doesn’t tend to take them far from their home town. The younger contingent of this group (D16 Side Street Singles) tend to be living in rented flats towards the town centre and have modest incomes and low levels of car ownership.
2.15 In additional to this information, It should be not ed when calculating the demand that there are a large number of people in Bexhill who do not have a particularly high propensity to use fitness gyms and this excludes a greater proportion of the population from enjoying a new facility than might be the case in a non-seaside.
Competition
2.16 The potential amalgamation of the swimming pool und er the same roof as the leisure centre reduces the number of fitness providers in the town. There are two small independent gyms in the town (Physiques Gym, 7 stations and TL Leisu re Club, 30 stations) and a hotel based leisure club at The Cooden Beach Hotel (Poolside Le isure Club, 7 stations). Meanwhile, Hastings is circa 4 to 5 miles away which has 3 or 4 fitness options. Therefore, the current Council run facilities are the main contributors to health and fitness in the area.
2.17 The table below summarises the projected latent dem and for health and fitness within the 3 mile catchment area of the new Bexhill Leisure Cent re site.
Table 2.1 – Latent Demand for the proposed Bexhill Leisure Centre
Population Projection
Total Demand in Catchment 1,483
Consideration for 20% of potential members who currently live outside the core catchment area
371
Estimate of Total Demand for Health & Fitness 1,854
Minus current membership 1,666
Estimate of Latent Demand for Health & Fitness 188
2.18 The table shows that TLDC have estimated the latent demand for a new wet and dry leisure centre in Bexhill to be 1,854 members as the total number of members they feel could be achieved. This is a latent demand of 188 members.
2.19 When looking at the demand for 1,854 members and us ing an industry average of circa 25 members per station, we calculate a requirement for a 74 station gym. However, a health and fitness suite should be able to accommodate abo ve 30 members per station before becoming too busy and adversely impacting on retent ion rates, so a 70 station would be adequate to still provide room to increase the memb ership above the identified latent
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 15
demand. Gyms are able to accommodate over 30 people per station due to classes becoming increasing popular with users buying memberships for the use of classes only.
2.20 This figure is also presuming that all 100% of the latent demand is to be met by the centre; therefore it is prudent to assume 70 stations will be adequate for the health and fitness suite.
2.21 A 70 station gym would require 5m2 per station to m eet IFI standards, therefore a gross internal floor area of 350m2. We would also recommend that the facility has 2 studios with a moveable wall. Classes such as spinning are increas ingly popular and require their own space which could be utilised in one of the studios.
2.22 In summary, we recommend that it is essential to re provide health and fitness at the new site. The gym should be no larger than a 70 station gym with 2 studios with a moveable floor to create flexibility with classes.
Swimming Pools
2.23 The Council has undertaken Facility Planning Model (FPM) for swimming pool water in the district of Rother in 2014. The report analysed tha t Rother has 4 swimming pools across 4 sites (Bexhill Swimming Pool, Crowhurst Park, Rye Sports Centre and St Marys School) totalling 974m2 of which 824m2 is publically availa ble (scaled with hours available in peak periods). There is a potential for 7,142 Visits per Week in the Peak Period (VPWPP) and this equates to 10.46m2 per 1000 people which is lower t han the national average (12.68m2) and the South East (14.01m2).
2.24 The FPM calculates that there is demand for 5,498 V PWPP, equivalent to 906m2 of pool water (including a comfort factor). In addition, th e population without access to a car is 17.8% which is lower than the national average and similar to the regional average. This suggests that the demand created is relatively mobi le. Therefore, the simplistic view of the supply and demand balance is -82m2, suggesting the current supply of water space is not sufficient to meet the demand across Rother.
2.25 In terms of satisfied demand (demand from Rother residents currently being met by supply), 81.6% of total demand is satisfied of which 88% tra vel by car. Not all of the demand that is created by Rother’s population will be met by swimm ing pools within Rother. The model shows that 30.4% of the demand that is currently sa tisfied is exported from Rother into other authority areas. This is significantly higher than all of the neighbouring authority areas, with the exception of Wealden.
2.26 Rother has 1,012 visits in peaks periods are not me t which equates to unmet demand as a percentage of 18.4% or 167m2 which is slightly high er than the South East and England. The data shows that circa 77% of this unmet demand is c aused by people living outside of the catchment of a swimming pool facility.
2.27 The FPM has calculated that the swimming pools in R other are being used at circa 63% capacity during the peak periods each week. This is generally in line with the national figure (64.7%) and slightly higher than the regional figur e (60.5%). This suggests that the facilities are below Sport England’s used capacity threshold o f 70% and above when pools are considered to be busy.
2.28 Those that have a used capacity of 100% are conside red to be theoretically totally full all the time in the peak periods. When we analyse individua l pools, Bexhill Leisure Pool is at 100% capacity and therefore significantly above the thre shold benchmark.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 16
2.29 In summary of the FPM, the model suggests that desp ite Rother being under capacity in terms of swimming pool water by circa 82m2, the sat isfied demand figures are lower than the regional and national averages and Rother also has an unmet demand of 18.4%. Therefore, it proposes that despite being a lack of pool water, the facilities across the district are not being utilised to their full poten tial. However despite this, Bexhill Leisure Pool has a 100% used capacity in peak times and is a very important asset to Rother.
2.30 This theoretical demand is supported by the financi al performance of the pool. In 2012/13,
the pool generated £[REMOVED] per m2 of pool water whic h is higher than our FMG benchmark for trusts of £778. Therefore, despite the age of the c urrent pool, the facility is performing excellently.
2.31 As a result of the evidence from the benchmarking a nd FPM, it indicates that additional pool water is required across Rother, especially in Bexh ill. However, to determine how much pool water is required, we have used the Sport England S ports Facilities Calculator (SFC). This tool analyses how much pool water is required for a new facility. While the calculation is crude, we can use it as a guide for the new pool.
2.32 There are currently circa 43,000 people in the town of Bexhill-on-Sea and the SFC equates this population to a requirement of 450m2 of pool water. Therefore, in order to be prudent, we believe there is potential to increase the amoun t of pool water at Bexhill to a minimum of circa 400m2, the equivalent of at least a 6 lane x 25m pool and 13m x 7m learner pool.
2.33 However, there is potential to move away from the o rthodox pool water and towards supplying large amounts of leisure water at the fac ility. Given the nature of the town and its location with the sea, consideration may be given t o create leisure water as the main focus, providing a facility for young people and families during inclement weather and providing another reason to come to the town.
2.34 Leisure water can be expensive to operate in terms of staffing, as it normally attracts young people, the water surface area (especially with wav e machines, water sprays etc.) can be difficult to allow the lifeguard to see down into the pool tank but this is normally down to scale and design but overall leisure water is a ver y popular facility type.
2.35 In terms of leisure water facilities in the local a rea, there is a limited amount available (see appendix A). The closest facility is The Sovereign Centre in Eastbourne (20 minutes’ drive time) which includes a fun pool, flumes and wave ma chine along with a traditional 6 lane pool, learner pool and diving pool.
2.36 Lewes Leisure Centre (37 minutes’ drive time) only has a flume while the next large leisure water is at Tenterden Leisure Centre in Kent (47 mi nutes’ drive time). This facility has a 25m swimming pool, wave machine, flume, bubble pool, pi rate slide, tipping buckets, spray rails and treasure chests. Therefore, there is a lack of competition in the immediate vicinity of Bexhill.
2.37 Overall, we suggest that it is essential that swimm ing pool water is resupplied at the new facility and increased to a minimum of at least 400 m2 of pool water, beginning with a standard lane pool and learner pool and then moving towards providing leisure water at the new centre depending on the affordability of the sc heme.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 17
Sports Halls
2.38 The Council have also undertaken the FPM model for sports halls in Rother. In the district, there are 7 halls across 6 sites; Battle Area Sport s Centre, Bexhill College Sports Centre, Bexhill High School, Bexhill Leisure Centre (2 hall s), Claremont Preparatory and Nursery School and Rye Sports Centre. These sites provide a supply of 24.1 courts of which 20.64 courts are publically available. It is calculated t hat Rother has 2.59 courts per 10,000 of the population which is lower than England (3.91 courts ), South East (4.14 courts) and the neighbouring authorities.
2.39 In terms of demand for sports halls, this equates to 3,676 VPWPP and the model analyses that 22.69 courts are required (including a comfort factor). It should be noted that the percentage of Rother’s population without access to a car is 17.8% which is lower than the national average and similar to the regional averag e. This also suggests that the demand created is relatively mobile. Therefore, in basic terms this creates a supply and demand balance of a requirement for 2.05 courts.
2.40 When the FPM model analyses deeper into the Satisfi ed Demand of Rother’s sports halls, it calculates that 91.8% of total Satisfied Demand is met. This is similar to the national figure (91.2%) but is lower than the figure for the south east region (94.5%). Of this Satisfied Demand, 85.1% is by those travelling by car which i s above the national figure (77.0%) and the regional figure (81.7%). However, the model sho ws that 30.7% of the demand that is currently satisfied is exported from Rother into other authority areas. This is significantly higher than all of the neighbouring authority areas , with the exception of Wealden.
2.41 Unmet Demand has been calculated at circa 303 visit s per week or 8.2% which is higher than the South East (5.5%) but lower than England (8.8%) . This equates to 1.88 courts and the FPM shows that 97.1% of this Unmet Demand is due to the population living outside the catchment area.
2.42 In terms of understanding the Used Capacity of the halls, the FPM has calculated that the overall capacity of halls used is 65.1% (South East 66.5% and England 68.5%). The FPM identifies that sports halls with a used capacity o f 80% and above are considered to be busy, therefore, the halls across Rother are currently under-utilised.
2.43 When looking on a site by site basis, the FPM shows that Bexhill Leisure Centre is at 100% Used Capacity, whereas Bexhill College (55%) and Be xhill High School (58%) are underutilised. Therefore, there is potential to increase community use at these two sites in order to reduce the burden on Bexhill Leisure Centre. Furthermore, due to its maximum capacity, Sport England identifies Bexhill Leisure Centre’s importance as a community facility and therefore it needs to be resupplied at the new centre.
2.44 In addition, our benchmarking analysis has also shown that the Bexhill Leisure Centre sports
hall is very well utilised. In 2012/13, the income per court was £[REMOVED] which is circa £[REMOVED] per court higher than our FMG benchmark figure for trusts of £15,834. Therefore, similarly to the pool, despite the age of the facility, the spor ts hall is performing excellently.
2.45 Overall, the evidence from the FPM and benchmarking has shown the need for a sports hall at the new Bexhill Leisure Centre. Currently, Bexhi ll Leisure Centre is operating at 100% used capacity and the benchmarks show it is currently pe rforming very well. Therefore, we would advise that a sports hall must be retained at the n ew Bexhill Leisure Centre.
2.46 The information would suggest there is potential to increase the size of the sports hall due to its high utilisation. However, we would advise that the hall remains as a 4 court hall and the
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 18
Bexhill College and Bexhill High School halls should increase their community use to help reduce the strain on the leisure centre. There is n ot enough evidence to suggest that the additional 2 courts across Rother should be supplied in Bexhill only in order to create a 6 court hall at the site.
2.47 Furthermore, the SFC calculates that circa 12 court s are required for a population of Bexhill, therefore falling in line with the current supply ( Bexhill College, Bexhill High School and Bexhill Leisure Centre all have 4 courts each). The refore, we recommend that a 4 court sports hall is included in the facility options.
Soft Play
2.48 A soft play area is designed to encourage health an d fitness in children, and promote physical activity. Every soft adventure play area i s used to accommodate the natural development of children through play incorporating running, bouncing, rolling, climbing, interactivity, special awareness, scrambling, swing ing, sliding crawling etc. These facilities can be used by toddlers to young children, dependin g upon the design of the facility and equipment.
2.49 There is currently the Jumbos Soft Play Centre at Bexhill Leisure Centre which targets ages 2-8 years and it offers all of the classic soft play features including slides, bridges, balls etc. There is also the opportunity to hold a birthday parties or for children to attend the after school activity club or holiday club.
2.50 In terms of competing facilities to Bexhill Leisure Centre within 20 minutes’ drive time, the full supply of soft play facilities can be found in Appendix A. The closest facility is Clambers Indoor Soft Play Centre (11 minutes’ drive time) wh ich has a multi-level climbing frame with slides, ropes, ball pits etc. There is also a garden (weather permitting) which has a climbing frame, paddling pool, large sand pit, play houses, slides and other activities. The analysis also showed that there are 3 facilities in nearby E astbourne; Treasure Island, Leo’s Play Den and The Play Station.
2.51 When analysing demand, we have looked at the curren t performance of the soft play facility.
In 2012/13, children’s activities generated circa £[REMOVED] at Bexhill Leisure Centre (£[REMOVED] when including activities at Bexhill Leisure Pool). Therefore, currently the facility does not make significant income to suggest soft play should be included in the proposed facility mix.
2.52 Generally in soft play ‘the bigger the site the bet ter’, however, due to the ageing population in Bexhill, there is only circa 5,600 children aged 0-14 years within 5 minutes of the site and a further 3,500 within 10 minutes (9,100 in total) and this is probably reflected by the income levels above in 2012/13. Therefore, it appea rs there is not great demand for soft play in the area.
2.53 However, there is currently no competition within 1 0 minutes of the facility and we believe that there is potential for the provision of soft p lay at the new site of a larger size to what is currently available at Bexhill Leisure Centre. This will cater for the local children and provide a facility on their doorstep.
Squash
2.54 Bexhill Leisure Centre currently has 3 squash court s including 1 glassed backed court. Including the centre, there are 13 courts within a 20 minute drive time of the new site (see Appendix A). However of the 13 courts, 9 of the squash courts are part of private clubs; Bexhill Squash and Social Club, Cooden Beach and Sp orts Club and David Lloyd Eastbourne,
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 19
therefore, private membership is required to access the courts. The only other public squash facility within 20 minutes’ drive time is at Summer field Leisure Centre (12 minutes’ drive time) where there is currently one court.
2.55 Unfortunately, we did not receive a breakdown of sq uash income for 2012/13, therefore we cannot fully analyse the current performance. Howev er, the ‘dry activities’ line of the profit
and loss account states that circa £[REMOVED] was gene rated at the centre, with a high proportionate most likely from squash income. This suggests that the 3 courts create circa
£[REMOVED] each per year, which is in line with industr y averages.
2.56 This information would propose that 3 courts should be retained in the new facility. We believe that due to the lack of publically accessib le squash courts in the area, there is adequate evidence to include all three as part of a larger leisure scheme but we would class them as a ‘non-core’ option.
Ten Pin Bowling
2.57 Ten Pin Bowling facilities are found across the country from small boutique offerings (i.e. 6-8 lanes) through to large multi-lane facilities (i.e. 30 lanes). They are often supported by ancillary services such as arcade machines, cafes, bars and pool tables to create a leisure experience for the user.
2.58 The activity generally targets those aged 5-34 year s old. The main target group is people up to the age of 44 years, with 0-15 years mainly aime d at party income and the 15-34 years for general pay play. The demand catchment is regarded as 120,000 people within a 20 minute drive time and this can create net bowling revenue of at least £30,000 per lane.
2.59 There is currently one facility within 20 minutes a t Lloyds Lanes, Eastbourne (20 minutes’ drive time). The facility is a large scale ten pin bowling facility which has 20 lanes, laser quest, pool, arcade and sports bar and grill. It should also be noted (see Appendix A) that there is also a 24 lane facility at Hailsham Leisur e 24 minutes’ drive time from the new site.
2.60 On average there is a population of circa 10,000 fo r each lane in the UK. In terms of demand, there are circa 202,000 people within a 20 minute c atchment area around the new site. This suggests there should be 20 lanes in the 20 minute catchment which is currently covered by Lloyds Lanes in Eastbourne. However of this catchment, 139,000 people are in the 10-20 minute catchment section, suggesting they come from the outskirts of Eastbourne, Hastings and Battle. As a result, those who live close to Eastbourne are likely to travel to Lloyds Lanes making it highly likely that they will travel to a facility in Bexhill which restricts the available catchment area.
2.61 Therefore, if we were to analyse the 0-10 minutes’ drive time only from the new site, there are 63,000 people and this would equate to a maximu m of 6 lanes. There is also potential for people from Hastings to travel to Bexhill as there is currently not a facility in Hastings. The new bypass will enable increased access for the Has tings residents, making the new centre an attractive proposition.
2.62 Overall, we believe that a large ten pin bowling fa cility (i.e. 20 lanes or above) would not work in Bexhill due to the competition in Eastbourne with a large proportion of the catchment likely to go to Lloyds Lanes. However, th ere is potential to include a 6 lane facility for the close population of Bexhill (circa 63,000 plus potentially Hastings residents) but we believe that this would only work as part of a broader offer and could not be a standalone facility.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 20
Climbing and Bouldering
2.63 Indoor climbing walls provide a range of climbing adventures for those of all abilities throughout the year. Climbing activities can be use d by all age groups but generally are more attractive to the younger market, and possibly stud ents, with younger people supporting the party income. Indoor bouldering involves climbing on a wall undertaken without a rope and is generally limited to small climbs with a safety mat below the participant to prevent injury.
2.64 There is currently no demand model for climbing wal ls and bouldering. However, by understanding the demographics of the local catchme nt and applying some historical user data it is possible to make an assessment for the l evel of demand.
2.65 Climbing attracts a wide variety of ages including children for parties etc. with young people starting at 4 years old and older climbers of 60 years old. The main demographic population groups are between 4 and 39 years of age. The prope nsity to participate from the age group 40 plus starts to see decay in demand which increas es with age.
2.66 A smaller type local facility would need to attract circa 18,000 users per annum which would require a total population catchment of over 106,00 0 within the immediate catchment and assuming that no other climbing walls were in the s ame catchment. For a larger facility the target sales is between 25,000 and 40,000 users but needs a catchment of between 150,000 and 250,000 within a circa 20 minute drive time
2.67 The supply of climbing walls within a 45 minute cat chment can be seen in Appendix WHAT. However, if we focus on a 20 minute drive time, it can be seen that there are currently two walls. There is a wall at Bexhill College (3 minute s’ drive time) which can cater for a maximum of 12 people at £4 a group. The wall is 8m high and 40m2. There is also a climbing facility in Hastings called the Robsack Centre (12 minutes’ drive time) where there is a 20ft wall as part of a sports hall. It costs £55 per hour (maximum of 9 people) and this includes hire of the climbing wall, tuition from a qualified instructor and hire of the equipment. It appears that pay and play is not available at eithe r centre and this could potentially be a market to penetrate.
2.68 When analysing the demand, we estimate that within 20 minutes of the site there are circa 202,000 people but this does not reflect the pull f actors of the walls in Eastbourne, Hastings and even Brighton. Due to the majority of the popul ation (circa 139,000) being located in the 10-20 minute band of the catchment, this means they any potential users are likely to travel to Eastbourne or Hastings.
2.69 In terms of catering for this immediate catchment 1 0 minute catchment of 63,000, the wall at Bexhill College is group hire only, leaving the pay and play market is open for a climbing wall at the new centre. As previously mentioned, it is estimated that an immediate catchment of 106,000 is required for a small wall, indicating that a wall in Bexhill is not viable. However, due to the Robsack Centre also bei ng group hire only and part of a sports hall (not a dedicated facility), a climbing wall at Bexhill potentially will be able to attract the population to the East from Hastings, especiall y with the opening of the new bypass.
2.70 Therefore, we believe that a dedicated climbing wal l (i.e. not part of a sports hall) could potentially be viable at the new Bexhill Leisure Ce ntre as part of an ‘core’ scheme. For it to work, the new facility will have to have scale, a r ange of different but complimentary facilities and have a destination feel to the site to draw people across from Hastings. There are a number of specialist providers that can be us ed to operate the facility for a rental stream, to de-risk this facility type for the Counc il.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 21
Spa Facilities and Health Suite
2.71 A spa facility is different from a health suite. A spa is defined as having a water based therapy, such as a hydro pool, Jacuzzi etc. and normally has a range of treatment rooms and a range of heat and ice treatments. A health suite consists of a sauna and steam room plus other heat experiences. It should be noted that hot els and beauty salons often use the word “Spa” in their name but are not necessarily spa fac ilities.
2.72 The local authority market has entered this market, providing beauty treatments and Spa facilities at a lower cost than some hotels and spa resorts. It should be recognised that they do not tend to cater for the spa day as such, with robes, lunch and expensive surroundings that you would find in a hotel spa.
2.73 Income can be high with most income coming from treatments and product sales, but also members bolting on the spa to their monthly members hips (where there is a gym) and casual users. Specialist qualified staff is required to operate the facility, and the key is to find an experienced spa manager in order to make the facili ty profitable.
2.74 A Spa does provide an element of sophistication and difference to a leisure site, providing something more up market, and this would be very su itable for the area of Bexhill. They are mainly used by women of all ages, but also men, it could provide a positive image of the town and cater for the older and ‘well off’ demographic in the town. There is also potential for sights looking over the sea would provide a very calming and relaxing offer.
2.75 We would expect any facility in Bexhill to include as a minimum (to be compliant as a spa rather than a health suite):
• 3 or 4 treatment rooms
• 4 x heat and ice experiences
• Sauna and steam rooms
• Plunge pool/Hydrotherapy pool
2.76 We have undertaken an audit of these facilities (se e Appendix A) and this also includes the locations and services (i.e. ice shower, ice founta in etc.) provided. The nearest spas to the new Bexhill Leisure Centre site are in Eastbourne ( The Grand Hotel, 20 minutes’ drive time) and Uckfield (East Sussex National De Vere, 36 minu tes’ drive time). There are also a range of spas in Brighton at a circa 45 minute drive time .
2.77 Therefore, due to the lack of similar facilities to the proposed Spa in the area, we believe that a Spa should be considered in any potential la rge scale scheme in Bexhill. It will create a different option to the surrounding competition which are generally hotel spas and will provide an affordable day facility for all ages of the community, providing a valuable asset to a large scale leisure option.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 22
What does this mean for the Council?
Broxtowe
• Health and Fitness Suite – There is latent demand o f a further 188 members, totally 1,854 members. This leaves a requirement of a 70 st ation gym, 25 stations less than the combined two facilities.
• Swimming Water – it is essential that swimming pool water is resupplied at the new site. The amount of water should be increase above to cur rent levels to a minimum of 400m2 with the potential to provide large scale leisure w ater if affordable.
• Sports Hall – A 4 court sports hall should be re-provided. There is not sufficient evidence to increase the size to a 6 court hall.
• Soft play – There is currently no competition within 10 minutes of the facility and we believe that there is potential for the provision o f soft play at the new site of a larger size to what is currently available at Bexhill Leis ure Centre.
• Squash – Within a 20 minute drive time, there are o nly 4 public squash courts, of which 3 are supplied at Bexhill Leisure Centre. Therefore, they should be resupplied but as a ‘non-core option’.
• Ten Pin Bowling - Bexhill appears to have a catchme nt population of circa 63,000 within a 10 minute catchment which suggests a 6 lane bespo ke facility may be achievable at the site but we believe that this would only work as pa rt of a broader offer and could not be standalone facility.
• Climbing Wall - in terms of catering for the immediate catchment, we believe that climbing and bouldering could potentially be viable due to the walls at Bexhill College and Robsack Centre being groups only.
• Spa Facility - due to the lack of similar facilitie s in the area, we believe that a Spa should be considered in any potential new centre in Bexhill.
03
3. Project Options
Facility Mix
3.1 The table below sets out the facilities to be inclu ded in the new sport and leisure facility based upon the results in Section 2.
Table 3.1 – Facility Mix
Facilities Basic Core
Main Pool 313 313 Learner Pool 91 91 Leisure Water - 75 Balance of Pool Hall 322 397 Total Pool Hall 725 875 Viewing Area 100 150 Wet Changing 300 400 Wet Support 100 100 Sports Hall 576 690 Hall Storage 75 85 Dry Changing 125 175 Dry Changing 125 125 Health and Fitness Gym 350 350 Studio (incl. Stores) 216 216 Treatment Rooms 50 50 Health Suite 100 100 Soft Play 100 Squash Courts (3) 185 Viewing Area 50 Café/Foyer/Kitchen/Vending 200 300 Admin and Reception 100 125 Meeting Rooms (2) 75 75 Main Drill Hall (2 courts) 350 350 Total for Facilities 3,567 4,501
Add Provisions for:Plant 357 450 Circulation 268 338 Internal Walls 89 113 Total 4,280 5,401
04
4. Capital Costs
Introduction
4.1 This section provides details of the construction costs, capital payments and equipment costs for each of the project options. These have been prepared from information provided by the design team Faulkner Brown.
Capital Payments
4.2 The table below sets out the capital payments which have been provided by Faulkner Brown.
Table 4.1 – Details of Capital Payments
All £ Basic Core
Main Construction Contract 12,000 13,500
Equipment Costs 214 245
Inflation to Construction Outturn 488 548
Capitalised Interest 745 893
Capital Receipts -8,000 -8,000
Total Capital Payments 5,447 7,186
Key Assumptions
4.3 The following assumptions have been used in prepari ng these costs:
• Gross Internal Floor Areas as set out in Section 3 above
• Price base 1Q-2014
• Professional fees included in the above figures
• Infrastructure works and contingency provisions inc luded
• Inflation at 3% per annum compounded
• Interest on construction drawdown charged to projec t and financed by debt
• Details of capital funding are set out in the table 4.3 below.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 25
Land Acquisition Costs
4.4 It is assumed that there are no land acquisition co sts to be included in the capital costs.
Decommissioning Costs
4.5 No provision has been made to the decommissioning costs of the swimming pool or the current leisure centre.
Capital Equipment
4.6 The project options models include some initial new equipment which will need to be financed and included in the overall capital paymen t cashflow within each of the Project Options Models. Detail of the equipment is shown in the table below.
Table 4.2 – Operator Equipment
All £ Basic Core
Swimming 31,743 31,743
CV Equipment 0 0
Resistance Equipment 0 0
Fitness General 42,474 42,474
Dance Studio 7,700 7,700
Sports Hall 24,500 47,400
Café 52,000 52,000
Administration 17,875 17,875
General 11,000 8,500
Other 0 10,000
ICT 26,850 26,850
Totals 214,142 244,542
4.7 Some of the equipment required will be financed thr ough leasing and will impact on the profit and loss account of the leisure operator.
Capital Funding
4.8 Details of the capital funding to support the capit al payments above are set out in the table below.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 26
All £’000 Basic* Core*
Sale of the Commercial Site Land 2,000 2,000
North Bexhill Housing Land 500 500
Surrender of the Swimming Pool Lease 2,000 2,000
Planning Gain from the Ravenside Developer 1,000 1,000
Capital Receipt from Marks and Spencer 500 500
Sport England Grant 1,500 1,500
Other Grants – (to be identified) 500 500
Totals 8,000 8,000
*these have been provided to us by the Council/Faul kner Brown.
Disposal of Old Equipment
4.9 We anticipate that the new facility will have all n ew equipment which the exclusion of some office equipment that may transfer. It is difficult to value the inventory of current equipment, but as a prudent approach we have not in cluded any value in the financial model for the proceeds of any disposal.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 29
New Business Plans
5.7 We have prepared a business plan for each of the pr oject options and we have highlighted the assumptions and outputs from the business plann ing undertaken and where appropriate compared this to the actual performance.
Key assumptions applied to Business Plan
5.8 The following assumptions have been used :
• Charitable trust operates the facility
• New facility opens April 2017
• VAT applied to catering and retail income only all other income exempt
• Recovery of VAT at 10%
• Operator directly manages retail and catering servi ces
• No corporation tax or capital allowances applied
• NNDR costs met by Council
• Building lifecycle costs are met by the Council
• Day to day maintenance, service contracts and preve ntative planned maintenance are the responsibility of the operator
Project Option – Basic Scheme
5.9 We have prepared a 5 year business plan for the bas ic scheme using the facility mix as shown in Section 3 and the current pricing. We have applied indicative programmes and made a comparison with the current performance as a sense check.
5.10 The table overleaf sets out a summary of the 5 year income and expenditure for the Basic project option.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 33
Supplies and Services
5.26 The current cost is circa £[REMOVED] and we have estim ated that the cost for the new facility
within the increased number of users is marginally more at £[REMOVED] per annum and covers postage, stationary, licences, consumables and professional services (cash collection, banking charges etc.).
Profit, Central Costs and Overheads
5.27 We have included within this heading, irrecoverable VAT, leasing costs, profit and overhead
recovery by an operator of the facilities totalling £[REMOVED] in Year 1 and circa £[REMOVED] by
Year 5. This compares to the actual cost in 2012/13 of £[REMOVED]. However we are not clear on whether the profit and overhead recovery is in the actual costs.
Project Option – Core Scheme
5.28 We have also prepared a 5 year business plan for the Core scheme using the facility mix as shown in Section 3 and the current pricing. We have applied indicative programmes and made a comparison with the current performance and that of the basic project option as a sense check.
5.29 The table overleaf sets out a summary of the 5 year income and expenditure for the Basic project option.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 35
5.30 It can be seen that the turnover of the business is £1.575 million (which compares £1.4 million for Basic scheme) rising to £1.67 million plus by Year 3 onwards (£1.5 million plus in Basic scheme).
5.31 The main changes between the Scheme and this Core s cheme are the provision of squash courts and also soft play.
Sports Hall
5.32 There is no change in the sports hall income at £71 ,000 in Year 1 and future years.
Health and Fitness
5.33 The table below sets out a summary of the income fo r fitness over gym membership, casual gym use and classes and is the same as the Basic sc heme.
Table 5.7 – Summary of Fitness Income
All £ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Membership Income
647,089 664,461 683,696 687,417 687,417
Casual Gym Income
34,624 25,279 12,639 12,639 12,639
Casual Class Income
31,738 28,564 25,707 23,137 23,137
Total 713,451 718,303 722,043 723,193 723,193
Swimming
5.34 Swimming income has increased from the Basic scheme to reflect the marginal impact of the leisure water of £13,000 in Year 1 and the comp ounding impact of this over the 5 years.
5.35 The table below sets out a summary of the swimming income over the first five years of operation.
Table 5.8 – Summary of Swimming Income
All £ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Casual Swimming
272,404 286,024 300,325 315,341 331,109
Swimming Lessons
164,206 172,416 181,037 190,089 199,593
Pool Hire 49,275 51,739 54,326 57,042 59,894
Totals 485,885 510,179 535,688 562,472 590,596
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 36
Meeting rooms
5.36 We have included a marginal increase in income for meeting room hire compared to the Basic option of circa £1.5k per annum.
Soft Play
5.37 Under this option we have included provision of soft play which is parentally supervised and generates revenues from casual use and party hire o f circa £90,000 per annum and rising to £110,000 by Year 5.
Squash
5.38 The inclusion of squash courts has resulted in additional income of circa £18,000 per annum rising to circa £23,000 by Year 5.
Café and Retail
5.39 Under this option, the increased projected usage wi ll increase café and retail sales by circa £23,000 before cost of goods sold but excluding VAT.
Employee Costs
5.40 We have calculated the level of staffing required, included employer on-costs for national insurance and pensions, plus holiday cover and training at £754,000 per annum which is higher than the Basic scheme of £739,000 and repres ents the cost of additional lifeguarding for the leisure water.
Premises Costs
5.41 Premises costs are linked to the gross internal floor area of the building. Under the Core scheme this is increased by 1.121m2 as shown in Sec tion 3 above.
5.42 However the main increase relates to utility costs which have increased by circa £30,000 and equipment lifecycle provision (from the margina l increase in equipment provision).
Supplies and Services
5.43 We have not increased the costs associated with pos tage, stationary, licences, consumables and professional services (cash collection, banking charges etc.) when compared to the Basic scheme.
Profit, Central Costs and Overheads
5.44 These costs are linked to income and with the incre ase in income we have seen a £15,000 increase in these costs compared to the Basic schem e.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 37
Marginal Impact of Supplementary Facilities
5.45 As part of our assessment of the facilities to be included in the business plans, we were asked to include the net marginal income or costs, after debt of a number of supplementary items and these are included in Appen dix D to this report but cover the following areas:
• Ten Pin Bowling (6 lanes)
• Small climbing wall
• Full Spa offer
• Crèche facility
• Replace formal water space with free form leisure water
5.46 Details of the financial implications are shown in the table below.
Table 5.9 – Marginal Impact of Supplementary Facilities
Marginal Impact*
Direct Operation of Ten Pin Bowling -£16,346.24
Direct Operation of Climbing (Small) -£56,596.24
Provision of full Spa Facility -£31,940.10
Replace Standard 6 lane pool + learner pool with le isure water configuration
-£165,400.20
Provision of a Crèche -£41,216.21
*negative is a cost.
5.47 Further details on the calculations, caveats etc. a re included in Appendix D to this report.
06
6. Financial Modelling and Affordability
Introduction
6.1 This section brings together the Net Present Value and affordability of each of the project options set out in Section 3. In particular this section covers the following:
• Key modelling assumptions
• Capital payments
• Capital receipts
• Debt costs
• Interest on temporary cashflows
• Net facility operating costs
• Lifecycle costs
• Cashflow Projections
• Affordability.
Key Assumptions for each Financial Model
9.1 The following assumptions have been used in project ing the forward costs of each of the options:
• Construction works will take circa 18 months to be completed
• Net Present Discount Rate is 3.5% (HM Treasury Gree n Book)
• Interest rates on temporary cashflow borrowing is 3% per annum
• Interest on temporary cashflow is capitalised and charged back to the scheme which is then financed from debt
• Investment interest on Capital Receipts received is 1.5%
• No inflation has been used in the models, other tha n 3% for capital inflation
• VAT is assumed to be fully recoverable by Council on its capital costs
• The net direct operating surplus budget for the two sites being considered as part of this report is £192,070 (made up of the manageme nt fee paid by the Council less the net direct operating cost of Rye £346,367 less £154,297) at 2012-13 prices and is used for affordability comparison purposes.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 39
Capital Payments
9.2 The main construction contract capital costs and ca pital funding have been provided by the design team. The equipment costs, inflation and capitalised interest have been calculated by the financial model and are shown in the table below.
Table 9.1 - Summary of Capital Payments
All £ Basic Aspiration
Main Construction Contract 12,000 13,500
Equipment Costs 214 245
Inflation to Construction Outturn 488 548
Capitalised Interest 745 893
Total Capital Payments 13,447 15,186
Net Capital Payments funded by Debt
9.3 The table below sets out the options and their resp ective capital payments, adjusted for internal capital funding, capital receipts and grants that will be financed from debt. The debt servicing costs will be charged to the on-going revenue costs of the project over the following 25 years.
Table 9.2 - Summary of Net Capital Payments to Finance from Debt
All £’000 Basic Core
Capital Payments 13,447 15,186
Less: Capital Funding -8,000 -8,000
Long Term Debt 5,447 7,186
Lifecycle Costs
9.4 We have calculated a broad estimate of building lif ecycle costs based upon 20% of the capital costs and divided over 25 years to obtain an annual contribution which is standard practice at this stage of the project. It should be noted that this provision does not include inflation and assumes full recovery of VAT attributable to lifecycle expenditure.
9.5 The table below sets out the total value of the lif ecycle fund and the annual contribution included within the financial model fo r each option.
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 40
Table 9.3 - Lifecycle Funds and Annual Contribution
All £’000 Total Building Provision
Annual Building Contribution
Total FF&E Provision
Annual FF&E Contribution
Basic 2,400 96 925 37
Core 2,700 108 1,050 42
9.6 The building lifecycle fund sets aside money to rep lace key elements of the building over its lifetime. The annual provision for FF&E is to meet the replacement of the original capital cost of FF&E provision acquired at the end of the build programme.
Net Operating Surpluses
9.7 A summary of the net operating surpluses for the two project options is shown in the table below. Detailed business plans are provided f or each option in Appendix B and C.
Table 9.4 - Summary of Net Operating Surpluses
All £ March 2018 March 2019 March 2020 March 2021
Basic 102,092 114,113 111,992 144,257
Core 163,573 182,605 187,008 226,132
Affordability
9.8 A key part of the equation is the annual cost of ea ch option compared to the budgetary provision that the Council will have to m eet the overall cost each year of the facility when the services are operational.
Affordability during Operation
9.9 The tables below sets out a summary of the first 4 years of revenue costs against the current budget provision. For the purposes of these tables any negative numbers are income.
Table 9.5 – Affordability Basic Scheme
All £ March 2018 March 2019 March 2020 March 2021
Net Operating Position Surplus 102,092 114,113 111,992 144,257
Building Lifecycle Costs -96,000 -96,000 -96,000 -96,000
Debt Costs -330,529 -330,529 -330,529 -330,529
New Bexhill Leisure Centre 41
All £ March 2018 March 2019 March 2020 March 2021
Total -324,437 -312,416 -314,537 -282,272
Current Budget (excl. Rye Cost) 191,000 191,000 191,000 191,000
Net Saving/(Additional Cost) -133,437 -121,416 -123,537 -91,272
Table 9.6 – Affordability Core Scheme
All £ March 2018 March 2019 March 2020 March 2021
Net Operating Position Surplus 163,573 182,605 187,008 226,132
Building Lifecycle Costs -108,000 -108,000 -108,000 -108,000
Debt Costs -436,003 -436,003 -436,003 -436,003
Total -380,430 -361,398 -356,995 -317,871
Current Budget (excl. Rye Cost) 191,000 191,000 191,000 191,000
Net Saving/(Additional Cost) -189,430 -170,398 -165,995 -126,871
Summary
9.10 In summary, both options produce an operational surplus.
9.11 However, after taking into account the capital cost s, funding and associated debt costs together with building lifecycle costs that a re probably not allowed for in the Council’s budget, both options will require additional support if they are too be affordable.
9.12 Taking into account the impact of any of the supple mentary schemes, these would increase the potential net deficit of each of the o ptions.
Contact
9.13 Please contract Kevin Godden, Director, FMG Consult ing on 07710710847 or [email protected]
88
86
87
Appendix 2
Environmental Agency Site Advice
Environment Agency
Orchard House (Endeavour Park) London Road, Addington, West Malling, ME19 5SH. Customer services line: 03708 506 506 www.gov.uk/environment-agency
Cont/d..
Mr Nigel Tye Faulkner Browns Architects Dobson House Northumbrian Way Newcastle upon Tyne Tyne and Wear NE12 6QW
Our ref: KT/2014/118350/01-L02 Your ref: Bexhill Leisure Centre Date: 18 June 2014
Dear Mr Tye Preliminary Opinion - Feasibility study for new leisure centre (including swimming pools) and commercial / residential / car parking development to the site of the existing leisure centre and drill hall (to be demolished) and the previous high school site (already demolished). Bexhill Leisure Centre/ Bexhill Down/ High School Site (now demolished), TN39 4HS. Thank you for consulting us on the pre-application enquiry regarding the above proposed development. We have reviewed the information submitted and have identified some areas that we feel need to be addressed as part of the planning application and these are set in our Preliminary Opinion below: Flood Risk Part of the site lies within Flood Zone's 3 and 2 and a main river (culvert) crosses the site or adjoins the eastern boundary. Please refer to the attached OS map extract. Flood Risk Assessment The application site lies within Flood Zone 3/2 defined by the Environment Agency Flood Map as having a high/medium probability of flooding. Paragraph 103, footnote 20 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires applicants for planning permission to submit an Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) FRA when development is proposed in such locations. For further guidance on assessing flood risk for planning applications and how to undertake a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) please refer to our website (link below):- https://www.gov.uk/planning-applications-assessing-flood-risk In particular, for this type of site, attention is drawn to "Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) Guidance Note 3". Your FRA should make reference to modelled flood levels (where available). Finished floor levels should be set accordingly. The construction of the new BHLR road should have no effect on local flood risk. Prior to investing resources in completing a FRA, applicants are advised to contact the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and discuss how the flood risk Sequential Test as set
Cont/d..
2
out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) will affect the proposed development. Proximity to Main River The line, dimensions and level of the Egerton Park Stream culvert (Classified Main River) should be identified and confirmed on site. Restrictions may apply to any works within 8 metres on either side of the culvert. It is recommended that no new buildings, structures (including gates, walls and fences) or raised ground levels are undertaken within 8 metres of the outside edge of the existing culvert. This provides for access for future watercourse maintenance or improvement and also safe floodwater conveyance and storage. Flood Defence Consent The site incorporates/is bounded by the Egerton Park stream, a main river under the jurisdiction of the Environment Agency. Any works whatsoever in, over, or under the channel of this watercourse on its banks within 8 metres from the top of the channel, would require the prior consent of the Agency under Section 109 of the Water Resources Act 1991 and/or Byelaws (known as Flood Defence Consent). For further information on how to apply for Flood Defence Consent please refer to our website (link below): https://www.gov.uk/flood-defence-consent-england-wales Activities controlled by flood defence consent The flood defence consent will control works in, over, under or adjacent to main rivers (including any culverting). Your consent application must demonstrate that: there is no increase in flood risk either upstream or downstream; access to the main river network and sea/tidal defences for maintenance and
improvement is not prejudiced. works are carried out in such a way as to avoid unnecessary environmental damage.
Mitigation is likely to be required to control: Off site flood risk We will not be able to issue our consent until this has been demonstrated. Contamination Site investigations to determine the extent of any contamination on-site need to be addressed and then preparation of a remediation strategy that will ensure that both during and after the construction phase there will be no adverse impacts on the environment will also be required. These reports should be included with any planning applications. Where these reports are missing, or where they do not demonstrate that the development of the site can go ahead without environmental damage, we will likely raise objection to the planning application.
Cont/d..
3
We also need to see information regarding the proposed surface water drainage arrangements for the site. Drainage schemes may need to be cross-referenced with the results of the preliminary risk assessment in order to avoid creating pathways for any contamination present. National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 109 states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels water pollution. Paragraph 120 states that local policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location, having regard to the effects of pollution on health or the natural environment, taking account of the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution. Government policy also states that planning policies and decisions should also ensure that adequate site investigation information, prepared by a competent person, is presented (NPPF, paragraph 121). We recommend that developers should: Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures
for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination. Refer to the Environment Agency Guidance on Requirements for Land Contamination Reports for the type of information that we require in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. Refer to our Guide for Developers which is designed to give practical advice on the environmental issues that may affect the site and provides some examples of sites where good practice has already been applied. Some of the topics covered in the guide include, managing the risk of flooding, wildlife & green space, managing waste and land affected by contamination. You can find this guide and links to further information at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-a-guide-for-developers .
Sustainable Drainage Surface water run-off should be controlled as near to its source as possible through a sustainable drainage approach to surface water management. SuDS seek to mimic natural drainage systems and retain water on or near to the site, when rain falls, in contrast to traditional drainage approaches, which tend to pipe water off site as quickly as possible. SuDS therefore offer significant advantages over conventional piped drainage systems and will be applicable to most sites. Government policy set out in paragraph 103 of the NPPF expects Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to give priority to the use of SuDS in determining planning applications. Whilst we generally welcome the inclusion of any SuDS features, they should always be appropriate for the conditions encountered where development is proposed. We would encourage developers to use 'open' features (swales, attenuation basins, wetland areas, etc) rather than subterranean storage tanks or over-sized pipes. Pumped solutions should be avoided (unless it can be clearly demonstrated that there is no viable alternative), and it must be ensured that the receiving network is of sufficient capacity to accommodate any proposed off-site discharge. The continued efficacy of any SuDS scheme is dependent on a robust and pre-determined maintenance regime, the details of which should be agreed with the LPA
Cont/d..
4
prior to the commencement of any development on site. Additionally, any excess surface water generated by an event which exceeds the design parameters should be retained on site in pre-determined areas which are well away from any vulnerable property and where the off-site flood risk will not be exacerbated by its presence. SuDs Guidance Guidance and references on SuDS can be found in Paragraph: 051 of the National Planning Policy Guidance, Reducing the causes and impacts of flooding. The Interim Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems provides advice on design, adoption and maintenance issues and a full overview of other technical guidance on SuDS. The Interim Code of Practice is available electronically on CIRIA's web site at: http://www.ciria.com/suds/interim_code.htm. Approved Document Part H of the Building Regulations 2010 also establishes a hierarchy for surface water disposal, which encourages a SuDS approach beginning with infiltration where possible e.g. soakaways or infiltration trenches. Where SuDS are used, it must be established that these options are feasible, can be adopted and properly maintained and would not lead to any other environmental problems. Where the intention is to dispose to soakaway, these should be shown to work through an appropriate assessment carried out under Building Research Establishment Digest 365. For further information on SuDS, ‘dry islands’ and situations where disposal to a public sewer is proposed, please refer to the Environment Agency Flood Risk Standing Advice at: https://www.gov.uk/flood-risk-standing-advice-frsa-for-local-planning-authorities . Helpful sources of information on SuDS include: the CIRIA C697 document SuDS manual HR Wallingford SR 666 Use of SuDS in high density developments CIRIA C635 Designing for exceedance in urban drainage – good practice the Interim Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems. The Interim
Code of Practice provides advice on design, adoption and maintenance issues and a full overview of other technical guidance on SuDS.
The Interim Code of Practice is available on our website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency and CIRIA's website at www.ciria.org.uk Under the terms of the Flood & Water Management Act 2010, each Lead Local Flood Authority will set up a Sustainable Drainage Advisory Body (SAB). Kent County Council (KCC) have been identified as the lead Flood Local Authority for this area and will be responsible for approval of surface water drainage infrastructure for new development. SAB approval will be required in addition to planning consent. We therefore recommend the applicant makes contact with the SAB at KCC to discuss details of the proposed surface drainage infrastructure. Enquiries should be made KCC via email at [email protected] . Swimming Pool Drainage Swimming pool effluent discharges result from the cleaning of filters (filter backwash) and the emptying of pool water (drain-down water).
Cont/d..
5
Filter backwash is the water used to clean accumulated pool dirt and debris off pool filters by reversing the flow across the filter. Cleaning of the filters is a regular exercise (weekly, monthly) and the backwash may contain a mixture of salts, acids, chlorine/bromine derivatives (or other disinfectants), particles of filtration medium and, potentially, accumulated cosmetic oils. Drain-down water arises from emptying the swimming pool. This may be done every three months or even yearly, depending on maintenance and level of use. The volume discharged will be high. The principal contaminant of concern is likely to be the disinfectant and its by-products. This is normally chlorine or bromine based, but hydrogen peroxide or ozone can also used, along with algicides, chlorine stabilizers and other water treatment chemicals. It is imperative that both drain-down water and filter backwash are left to stand (passive venting-off) before being discharged. This can be either within the pool or in a holding tank and its aim is to allow disinfectant concentrations to reduce. The period required for natural venting-off is between two and five days, depending on the nature of product and initial concentrations (chlorine/ bromine disinfectants require longer than ozone/peroxide products). Alternatively, de-chlorination tablets (e.g. sodium thiosulphate) can be used although adding chemicals is not encouraged. If a holding tank is used it will require periodic de-sludging, owing to settlement, with the silt needing to be removed and disposed of appropriately. Hot tubs must also need to be allowed to cool to ambient temperature. Discharge of filter backwash Note! The discharge of filter back-wash direct to surface water is not permissible. Although of small volume, this effluent has the potential to be highly toxic. If disposal to foul sewer is not available, disposal to groundwater via an infiltration system (soakaway), can then be considered. If a groundwater assessment (see Section Discharge to Groundwater: Discharge of Filter Backwash) concludes this disposal route is not permissible, filter backwash may be disposed to surface water via a domestic package treatment plant in some situations. This is potentially acceptable under the following conditions if; it can be passed through the treatment plant without adversely impacting on the
treatment facility and effluent discharge quality; the backwash forms a small proportion of the discharge (a high dilution ratio of backwash : domestic sewage effluent) so reducing the risk; the sewage treatment plant manufacturer confirms that the plant can effectively treat the proposed backwash; the operator monitors the discharge to ensure plant performance is not compromised (as detailed in the permit).
Evidence of the above must be provided in support of an application for a new permit or to vary an existing permit, to surface or groundwater. In addition the applicant must submit details of the potential substances and concentrations present (available from supplier / manufacturer of the filters) to enable the Environment Agency to accurately determine the application and acceptability of the discharge. Discharge of drain-down water Discharge of drain-down water requires an assessment on a case-by-case basis at a pre-application stage to consider the variables of volume, effluent content and receiving water. The applicant must prove that the discharge will not:
Cont/d..
6
have an impact on the receiving surface water environment; contain solid, polluting, offensive or injurious substances; contain any substances prejudicial to fish or spawn, or to spawning beds or food of fish; have an adverse environmental impact; and, because of the potentially high volumes, the applicant must show that: the rate of discharge will be controlled to prevent any significant scouring of the bed or bankside of the receiving water; the discharge will not cause or significantly contribute to flooding downstream.
If our initial assessment concludes potential impact to the receiving watercourse, then we would require the operator to apply for an environmental permit so a more thorough assessment can be made. This application may, or may not, result in the issue of a permit. Note! Small, low volume discharges such as hydrotherapy pools may be disposed of via a domestic sewage treatment facility. De-chlorination via a holding tank is still an essential requirement, and the conditions of disposal listed above still apply. Discharge to Ground / Groundwater Discharge of filter backwash If an operator proposes a discharge to ground that contains filter backwash (either alone or in combination with other effluent sources) an environmental permit will be required. The permit application must include a risk assessment of the proposed effluent disposal and the discharge site for its suitability. Issues that need to be considered include; information on the suitability of the site – height of the water table, percolation (Vp)
results, soil conditions, vulnerability of the underlying ground waters to pollution, the proximity of other abstractions and whether the site is located in a groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ) demonstration that there is no risk of run-off to surface waters preferably a properly constructed infiltration system (soakaway) / reed bed. The use of geotextile membranes can aid retention time of effluent
As the discharge is considered a trade effluent (see ‘Charging for Discharges’), it is appropriate to refer the application to Groundwater & Contaminated Land team to assess the risk posed, regardless of discharge volume. Discharge of drain-down water If the operator proposes a discharge to ground that contains drain-down water only and is 5m3/day or less, it may be a de minimis activity, which does not require a permit as long as: the drain-down water is of drinking water quality standard, with no discernible
hazardous substances the discharge has been left to de-chlorinate for at least 2-5 days and does not contain concentrations of chlorine above 0.2 mg/l.
Not withstanding the above, whether a discharge is via a soakaway or directly onto land via irrigation (e.g. plant watering), the discharger still has a duty of care to the environment. They must ensure, for example, that the land area is not waterlogged, and that the ground is not frozen.
End
7
A discharge of drain-down water/effluent over 5 m3/day is not automatically defined as de minimis and would require an application and subsequent assessment by the Environment Agency. Depending on the specifics of the discharge and the site, the GWCLT will decide whether the discharge is de minimum or that a permit is required. Developers Guide Our Guide for Developers is designed to give practical advice on the environmental issues that may affect sites and provides some examples of sites where good practice has already been applied. Some of the topics covered in the guide include, Green Roofs, using water wisely, wildlife & green space, managing waste and land affected by contamination. You can find this guide and links to further information at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-a-guide-for-developers. Review of documentation and Further Work We have not undertaken a detailed review of the pre-application enquiry. We cannot confirm at this stage whether the proposed development is acceptable to us. We do have a voluntary charged-for service where we can provide more detailed pre-application advice to the applicant. As part of this service, we can provide a dedicated project manager to act as a single point of contact to coordinate any problems, data requests or review technical documents. Should the applicant wish us to undertake a detailed review of the proposal (or any subsequent documentation) or want further advice to address the land contamination issues, we can do this as part of our charged service. We can also provide advice on what would be required to secure a Flood Defence Consent for works within 8 meters of a main river. Whilst we have identified some potential issues with this proposed development, we are keen to work with the applicant in resolving these so that we do not have to raise objection at the formal planning stage. Please note that the view expressed in this letter by us is a response to a pre application enquiry only and does not represent our final view in relation to any future planning application made in relation to this site. We reserve the right to change our position in relation to any such application. You should seek your own expert advice in relation to technical matters relevant to any planning application before submission. Yours sincerely Pp Jennifer Wilson Miss Kerry Hesmer Planning Advisor Direct dial 01732 223272 Direct e-mail [email protected]
88
84
89
Appendix 3
Feedback from User Groups
1
Nigel Tye
From: Laura Leslie <[email protected]>
Sent: 04 July 2014 18:58
To: Nigel Tye
Subject: Let us know your views on the potential facility mix for a new leisure centre in Bexhil
Dear Nigel,
I was sent an email by Scott Lavocah at Rother District Council and he indicated we should contact you
direct, with reference to our ideas for the proposed Leisure Centre.
As a local Yoga Teacher, of course, my thoughts are that there should be a room for group exercise. There
is a definite need in the area for specialist classes for key groups -
Mental Health - Stress, addictions etc. Possibly linked to the association Mind. I can put you in touch with
them.
Senior Citizens - special classes, eg. chair exercises.
Young Mothers
Pregnant Ladies
Arthritis
Obesity to tie in with the "Keep Rother Active Campaign"
Thank you for considering some of the options and do please contact me if you would like clarification.
--
Laura Leslie
Always Yoga
07580 984539 01797 227564
FAO Nigel Tye Faulkner Brown Architects
15th July 2014
Dear Mr Tye,
At the invitation of Scott Lavocah I write to provide an input into the considerations for the new Rother Leisure Centre study.
Having read the summary of the proposed provision of facilities, I am confident that good provision is being
considered for all user groups. The mix would seem both adequate and sensible.
We at Silverdale are of course are only qualified to speak apropos our specialist sport – SWIMMING. To that
end may I enlighten you as to who we are.
Silverdale Swim Schools (SSS) is a Registered ASA SWIMMING SCHOOL operated by joint partners - Trevor and Susan Spinks.
SSS has been regularly hiring the Bexhill Leisure Pool (BLP) for c.10 years. We teach and coach children from the age of rising 4 years up until the age of about 17 years. Since operating at Rother’s BLP, our pupil
numbers have steadily risen year after year; despite the recession. We currently provide swimming lessons in Bexhill for 700+ children and young persons per week. We also have a significant waiting list.
Our USP is clearly our ratio of staff to pupils, which we are confident cannot be surpassed. Testimonies to
our exceptional high quality, yet very reasonably priced lessons, can be read by studying the many reviews
formally accredited to us. Our website currently features a staggering 339 FIVE STAR REVIEWS from highly satisfied parents and carers. All the ratings & comments can of course be validated as they are
submitted via a quality control agency. Our quality of service is such that we are currently rated 1st out of 48 UK Swimming Schools
We are in the happy position of having a dedicated and well trained workforce of over 50 persons which is highly acclaimed for its professionalism and efficiency by the public and indeed within the sport per se;
Unfortunately, the demand for our teaching service greatly outweighs the water resources at our disposal;
hence the massive waiting list.
The spectrum ages of our clientele being what it is, we can only provide our much sought-after lessons, after
the end of the school day. It necessarily follows that we cannot commence our lessons until 4pm on a weekday at the earliest.
When deliberating upon the provision of resources for water based activities, we urge you to take our
requirements and the fact that we are forever expanding into due consideration.
You may be interested in viewing our website - www.silverdaleswimschools.co.uk
It will give you the flavour of what we do, how we do it, and more importantly, who we do it for.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if i can assist you further.
Yours sincerely,
Trevor Spinks
1
Nigel Tye
From: Warren Trunchion <[email protected]>
Sent: 15 July 2014 09:51
To: Nigel Tye
Subject: Fwd: New leisure centre for Bexhill
Dear Sirs I am writing in response to the potential new leisure facility in Bexhill and to ask you to include
our clubs/sports needs within your considerations.
I run South Coast Inline, we are a sports for development in Line Hockey club and currently use the Bexhill
leisure centre for 2 regular weekly training sessions.
We play in Line Hockey and have been training there for approaching 3 years. In total we run 4 weekly
sessions at different venues (in Hastings, Bexhill and battle) and are ideally looking for a permanent venue
to accommodate all our teams trainings and games.
As well as running this local club I am also chairman of the south east skater hockey association (SESHA)
which has members throughout the south east. Previously we have used the Summerfield’s leisure centre
(also freedom leisure) as our home venue and played league games and hosted national tournaments there.
Unfortunately this year the floor was replaced (funded by the badminton association) with a soft floor that
we are unable to skate on. Subsequently we have several different training/games venues and after losing
Summerfields had to merge leagues and now require our players/teams to travel to the London and eastern
league to play league games in London and Essex.
The currently sports hall in Bexhill is of adequate size for us train on but lacks the additional space for
spectators and match day officials for games. As a club/association we continue to look at the feasibility of
having a bespoke roller rink and feel that there is a viable business opportunity to sustain this.
A normal sports hall may not be able to support our sport where as roller rink could still be multi purpose
and accommodate other sports such as 5 a side football, badminton and basketball for instance? The specific
venue would attract not only roller sports but other associations/sports. As well as my our club using such a
facility there are also teams in Eastbourne, Lewes, Brighton and Tunbridge, whom would be willing to
travel to Bexhill for games and trainings if the venue/facilities where appropriate. In addition to hockey
there are then other sports/activities, including Roller discos which we could host, plus these have been held
at both Bexhill and Summerfield’s by the SK8 school. Hockey Training camps (during half terms). 1066
roller dance now also use Bexhill following the floor change at Summerfield’s; again they have regular
weekly sessions plus events and competitions. There is also roller derby which again has previously been
held at Summerfield’s plus of roller sports disciplines.
The number of hours/different uses would ultimately depend on what facilities where available but could be
anything from our local teams training there to hosting our league (approx 20 -30 Sundays over the year 10
– 6pm) local, national and international tournaments. Multiple roller sports disciplines own trainings,
games and tournaments.
I have listed below the details of our requirements in different tofms and hpw that should a new venue be
built then we would still be accommodated in some way.
Minimum Requirements
• Similar size hall to the present sports centre
• Changing facilities
• Hard floor
• Room to store our goals
2
Subject to availability we could hold all 4 training session in one venue approx 6 – 8 hours per week all year
round
More useable space
• Hall similar size to Summerfields leisure centre
• Spectator viewing
• Barriers to separate the playing surface/match day officials area
• Changing facilities
• Hard floor
• Room for goals/match day equipment
Subject to availability we could hold all 4 training session in one venue approx 6 – 8 hours per week all year
round
Regular games and exhibitions
League venue for SESHA (approx 20-30 Sundays over the year 10 – 6pm)
Annual tournaments (local/national – possibly international?)
Could attract other roller sports
Ideal requirements
• 40m x20m enclosed Playing area with rounded corners
• Spectator viewing area
• Match day officials players substitution area.
• Sports court multi purpose hard floor.
• Storage for goals and match day equipment
Subject to availability we could hold all 4 training session in one venue approx 6 – 8 hours per week all year
round. This would increase due to expected demand
Regular games and exhibitions (feature semi professional games)
League venue for SESHA (approx 20-30 Sundays over the year 10 – 6pm)
Annual tournaments (local/national/international)
Would attract other roller sports
• different forms of roller hockey (there is a distinct lack of purpose built facilities in the UK, and
various forms of roller hockey)
• Roller derby (currently the fastest growing roller sport in the country)
• Roller discos (Multiple throughout the week; including public and private parties)
• Sledge hockey (for disabled)
• Roller Dance
• Speed/slalom skating
I appreciate that you would not be able to accommodate all thoughts/request and suggestions but if new
leisure facility was to go ahead would welcome the opportunity of having further input so that our sport
is not again forced to find a even less suitable venue. Though part of my request comes from our own
need there is also a genuine need for a recreational activity locally and I feel that roller rink which others
such variety in a seaside town would prove popular with both residents and tourist.
I thank you for the time in reading this and would be happy to answer any questions you have
Kind Regards
Warren
South Coast In-Line
SESHA Chair
1
Nigel Tye
To: Scott Lavocah
Subject: RE: Bexhill Rowing Club
From: Phil McCorry
Sent: 17 September 2014 19:35 To: Scott Lavocah
Subject: Bexhill Rowing Club
Hi Scott,
A while ago i emailed you about the Rother feasibility study for the possible new leisure centre and asked
if an indoor rowing tank could be considered, i am just wondering if you have an update on this or not?
Also are their any community grant schemes that the Rowing Club can apply for for new equipment or
coaching hours?
Regards
Phil McCorry
Follow all news stories on Twitter
Visit our Website
********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please email us.
Any views expressed are not necessarily the views of Rother District Council unless stated.
This email message has been checked for the presence of computer viruses and malware, however we accept no liability for any unknown virus contained in the message or any attachments. **********************************************************************
90
95
Appendix 4
Retaining the Drill Hall in the Masterplan
96
Further to discussion on the Drill Hall there is a possibility, for its sentimental value, that
retaining the frontage, or frontage / main hall, may be required. If the Drill Hall was to be
retained this could be accommodated quite easily and embraced successfully in many of
the masterplan options. Historically the Drill Hall has sat quite autonomously in the site
and could continue to ‘sit in its own space’ or be conjoined with commercial development
or the leisure centre. The Drill Hall could be converted to a community hall, facilities as
part of the leisure centre or a pub / restaurant.
Option 1
Similar to Option 1B of the feasibility study with a new build leisure centre to the east
of the frontage site with residential to the north and retaining the Drill Hall either the
frontage or including the main hall space with later lean-to additions removed. The option retains positive connectivity to the Skills Centre and across the site. The link
between the Drill Hall and leisure centre could be a physical building element such as
a cafe foyer or alternatively could be an external plaza space potentially with a roof canopy.
97
Option 2
Similar to Option 2 of the feasibility study with a new build leisure centre to the centre of
the site and commercial / residential to the east of frontage retaining the Drill Hall. There
are several ways the accommodation and car parking to the frontage could be laid out
including the potential to integrate a hotel / restaurants alongside the Drill Hall.
98
As stated in the feasibility report retaining and extending the existing Bexhill Leisure
Centre will require signiicant demolition and remodelling to conjoin new wet facilities and may not be a cost effective solution. The options shown are purely to test the
potential layout/it on the site particularly if the Drill Hall is retained.
Retain / Extend Option 1
Retaining the existing Bexhill Leisure Centre and extending to create a wet sports to the
east side would require a connection to be driven through the centre from a new entrance
on the western edge. This would require signiicant remodelling and demolition which, together with the tightness to the eastern boundary, suggests this option would be
unfeasible and ineficient. If the culvert cannot be realigned this option is not possible.
99
Retain / Extend Option 2
With the wet facilities to the west side you could retain the majority of the existing Bexhill Leisure Centre though a route will still require to be driven through to tie the facilities
together. This option would retain the entrance in approximately its existing position
though may require extending (as shown) to provide dry changing / hall storage which
would be lost by creating the central connection. The car park is shown maximised around
the entrance (c.100 spaces) with additional spaces to the west of the facility. The centre
of the site would be residential.
Dobson House
Northumbrian Way
KillingworthNewcastle Upon Tyne
NE12 6QW
Tel. +44 (0)191 268 3007
Fax. +44 (0)191 247 8132
